One of the symptoms of our decline is the failing of our families. Many people don't marry at all, don't select their partner(s) carefully for their marital quality or obtain divorce on a whim. Too few children get born and those who do get born, often get raised by single parents or in dysfunctional households. People give having fun top priority in their lives, and reproduction seems to happen more or less randomly.
It has been opined before by some that the decline of organized religion caused this mess and a return to it could cure it. This was countered by the observation that nations with deeply rooted Catholicism, like Poland or Hungary, have a particularly appallingly low fertility rate. However, it can't be denied that religion does have an influence on how people live, Islam is an example.
I am a lifelong atheist myself and couldn't believe in God if I tried. But organized religion is more than just the faith in a supernatural entity, it consists of other beliefs and practices, too. Islam is notorious for setting strict rules for every aspect of life for its adherents to live according to. It is because of these rules that muslims choose their partners among themselves and that they don't practice contraception. (At least they shouldn't, according to the stricter interpretations of Islam) These rules "work" insofar that even in the absence of government enforcing them Islam thrives and its adherents multiply in numbers. Judging by its spread, the rules of Islam are quite successful.
Christianity used to have such rules, too. Pre- and extra-marital sex and contraception used to be forbidden according to the rules set by religion. I read once, that some centuries ago in a part of Germany even marrying a partner of a different religious persuasion was condemned of by the Church. Even if these were not enforced by government, the mere fact that the Church condemned it, had an affect on the moral behavior of the people.
I am not an insider, but from the outside it looks to me as if nowadays Christianity is almost completely reduced to the faith in God. Moral rules concerning reproductive behavior are not taken seriously anymore and community members are not ostracized for violating them. Therefore, to those of us, who don't believe in God, religion seems to serve no useful purpose. But maybe organized religion could serve a purpose, if it devised rules which fit into our time and address the problems we have, and if it took these rules seriously and tried its best to enforce them within the community?
I was born to atheist parents who did not try to impose any moral rules concerning reproduction on me or influence me in any other way. It was completely up to me to decide on how to live and what to do with my life. I am under the impression that, at least in my country, most people grow up in that way. No wonder that they rarely have children - nobody told them to, nor to submit to any rules at all interfering with what is generally taken for granted as to be the primary purpose of life: To have fun. Children are an inconvenience and even though the government helps in coping with the financial burden, people often don't want any in the first place.
What can we do? We seek political power, we strive to influence the governments of our countries in order to change the law and enforce different rules. But as we don't have any such political power now and, quite possibly, not get any in near future, maybe we should at least try to live and enforce rules, which we deem necessary for our survival, among ourselves? Maybe it sounds cranky, but I, being an atheist, want to suggest us creating an organized religion, a new one, not centered around or insisting in any belief in supernatural entities, but as a community developing and implementing a strategy for our survival as a group, consisting of rules which we try to adhere to and enforce among ourselves as far as this is possible without the power of a government. Other ethnic or religious groups have survived over centuries as separate minorities without becoming extinct, and as we now face the prospect of quickly becoming a minority in our own countries, too, shouldn't we at least try to adjust our habits and possibly get ourselves organized into a religious community?
Such a community could not only reinforce our shared commitment to survive as a group, but also teach people on what we believe is important, on how to go about life and assist them in it. Naturally, the creation and upbringing of the next generation must be our ultimate concern. Whenever financial difficulties are a problem, wealthy community members could volunteer to help out poor ones, for the common purpose. I have no experience of organized religion myself, and maybe I am silly for thinking that such a community could be held together, even without a common faith in God. But it seems to me that it would help greatly, if we overcame our relative individualism compared to other people and acted together in a communal way. If it is possible to make people pray in a mosque five times a day, even without a government enforcing it, why shouldn't it be possible to make people have enough children, too?
Abonnieren
Kommentare zum Post (Atom)
Posts
6 Kommentare:
I have a simple suggestion to help Western countries have more white babies: Selling babies should be authorized. There is nothing wrong with that. It would be morally better than killing them before they are born, and it would not be as destructive of European society as allowing the adoption of non-white babies. White couples who are unable to have children would simply pay to have the baby of a young unmarried teenager. In the current system, what happens is that white couples who would like to adopt a baby are unable to find one. Out of despair, they adopt an African baby (most adopted African babies have probably been bought too, but no questions are asked). By the way, I'd like to read the crime statistics for black men who were adopted as babies by European couples.
Hi Limpet,
thank you for your comment. I agree that permitting selling babies would be a sensible change of policy and I memorized your idea. However, this is something only a government could do - and we don't have control over the government. I can think of many sensible and workable proposals for what a government could do in order to stimulate births. But as I can't implement them, on this blog I am more interested about things that a group of people can do without government support.
About your question regarding the crime statistics for black men who were adopted as babies by European couples: Sorry, I don't know. I only found that in the year 2004 there were 5064 adopted babies in Germany, of which 1632 were not German citizens, and only 132 of those came from Africa.
By the way, am I right to assume that you are from the United States?
Hi Pasta, I'm not American, or my English would sound better. I am from Brittany. I know someone who has recently adopted an Ethiopian baby. The figures you give for Germany show that not everyone is thrilled at the idea of an oversea adoption. It is a good thing. It would be interesting to know how many people couldn't find a baby to adopt. Anyway, I realize that making more European babies available for adoption by discouraging abortion would only have a marginal effect on our population.
Your idea of creating a community dedicated to raising more children is funny, but after all, I think the Mormons have done something similar in the USA. At least, they were famous for raising large families.
Your idea of creating a community dedicated to raising more children is funny, but after all, I think the Mormons have done something similar in the USA. At least, they were famous for raising large families.
They still are famous for that, aren't they? Yes, the Mormons are an example for what I am thinking of. The existence of organized religious communities proves that it is possible, even in a liberal society, to make people voluntarily adhere to the community's moral standards and donate a large share of their income to a common purpose.
Don't miss Diamed's posts about this subject, they are very good:
The infinite plasticity of man
A remnant of a remnant Part I
A remnant of a remnant Part II
It bugs me that you called the idea "funny". There is nothing funny about it, it's a perfectly natural and sensible approach to our problem and we deride it at our peril. With few exceptions, White people are not used anymore to live as part of communities and be subject to social control. This lifestyle causes us to go extinct and there is absolutely nothing about it that we should be proud of.
Funny is not the right word, but you wrote yourself that your idea of creating a new religion dedicated to our survival may sound 'cranky'. In fact, it would not be a religion at all. Religion has to do with the existence of God and the meaning of life. What you advocate sounds like a community based upon a practical philosophy rather than a religion, but you do not give any details except that its members should have many children. What is odd, in the way you and Diamed present your solutions, is that they sound very theoretical. The name "Church of Eugenics" sounds very odd too. In fact, the Mormons did not create their religion specifically to improve birth rates. Their habit of raising large families probably did not start immediately.
I think our real problem in the West is immigration, the religion of race-replacement, and the growing non-white population. Otherwise, the birth rate crisis would not be worrying. But this is another case of a policy only government can change. Until we get rid of our anti-European governments, our priority should be to say clearly to our fellow whites that miscegenation is morally wrong because it destroys us and our future. We must also defend our right not to associate with non-whites, a right usually denied us by recent laws.
I think you should read John Young's articles on European Americans United's website. He also calls for the creation of white communities, but he gives more details, and takes a practical, activist approach. I haven't read every article yet. Apparently, his focus is not on raising the birth rate, but I think the creation of tight-knit white communities would rise the birth rate anyway. His approach is not as direct as yours, but the result is the same, and it sounds less crazy that way.
Kommentar veröffentlichen