Today's BLEAKPILL: Doesn't matter the nation, the regime, the religion, the elite, the policies - birth rates in every advanced country plunge to below replacement. Once it became technologically feasible to control reproduction, most women do not want kids. Many despise them. Probably 99.99% of kids born ever were an "accident" and if anyone had the ability to prevent them, they would not have been conceived. But our species guaranteed reproduction via it being linked to our lowest impulses. Now they are separated. So many women think, why bother?

One of the tiring things writing columns about GOP Congress or even with Trump in office was "well, they could just do this." But they won't "do this." It doesn't matter if the polls are on their side. It doesn't matter if they had promised to do it. They just won't. Trump's 2016 immigration platform was a perfect example. He didn't do it. He even said he wasn't serious about getting Mexico to pay for the wall - but he already had a whole list of things from his own website about how to do it. See for yourself.

web.archive.org/web/2016111509…

To be a Decent Human Being, you need to simultaneously believe that it is outrageous to say a meritocracy might lead to fewer blacks at elite institutions, but also believe affirmative action is absolutely vital to diversity, which is the greatest strength of any institution. You must believe that diversity is strength because it provides new perspectives that prevent groupthink. You must also believe that retrograde social views are a threat to physical safety of marginalized communities. The marginalized communities are the ones with state backing.

America exists to deconstruct social and institutional bonds that make it possible for normal people to have decent lives. You financialize the aftermath. The money lets you build barriers against the consequences of egalitarian ideology. The result is economic growth. Equality is a shit test. It’s a strategy in status completion and an effective one because indirect approaches outperform direct, honest contests of strength. What is, after all, the lowest thing you can be today? Too poor to avoid diverse public schools and neighborhoods.

Do pro-white activists strike everyone as worshipful of contemporary whites? Or self- congratulatory? No, we think our people have strengths and weaknesses but we see that certain things are objectively bad for us - self-hatred, incitement against us, replacement migration, etc.

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1746269522938470403

We have a higher ideal of what our people could be and, at times, have been. If that’s the “idol,” every ideal anyone has is an idol. But without ideals, why are we even alive? Having an ideal for what you can be, your nation can be, and your people can be is good actually.

The danger is not "collapse" in the sense of Road Warrior Days coming upon us and everyone getting to IRL their Living Dead fantasies. It's that Fukuyama is actually right, that this is the end of political development, and that Last Men just take us on a slow, eternal decline. One of my schizo theories is that this is sort of what Biden v. Trump is Really About. Think of Biden's campaign. He is here to protect Our Democracy. Our Democracy can't deliver what previous generations took for granted, polls show everyone's miserable, but the alternative...

Years ago I did a thesis on Rhodesia and its relationship with southern Africa. Key to its collapse was the decision by white South Africa to cut a separate peace with the black countries after the collapse of the Portuguese empire. Thought they would be left alone. 1/ This didn't happen. But first, the end of South African trade meant Rhodesia couldn't endure. Pressured by the West (especially the UK), they had to cave in. Ian Smith wanted a power-sharing agreement, even a black leader, but not Mugabe. West demanded Mugabe, we know the rest 2/

Most strive for the next rung of the existing system. The journo wants to be on TV. The TV host wants celebrity. So what does the conservative journo want? To be a liberal journo.

A few examples and a thread on politics and life.

Kaitlin Collins, Daily Caller to CNN

Betsy Woodruff Swan, "former National Review Institute William F. Buckley Journalism Fellow" to Politico/MSNBC.

What exactly is the point of conservative donors funding this?

All ruling classes act in defense of their own self-interest, not those of whom they rule. Sometimes, the two interests are linked. Sometimes, as in the modern post-Western world, they are not. The ruling class sees the historic population of the West, whites, as its main enemy. Why? The same reason kings would often hire foreign mercenaries. Other populations have no reason to identify with the nation, its history, heroes, or culture. They are thus dependent on the Regime and the anti-white orthodoxy it defends. We don't need the Regime. They do.

All right, I'll bite. One big reason anyone is Christian at all is because it was a religion of empire imposed and defended by emperors and kings in a hierarchical civilizational order that derived not just from the faith, but from Western folkways and traditions. That's good.

https://twitter.com/HootenWilson/status/1665095506857476097

Now you can argue that wasn't "true Christianity" or that Christianity should never be imposed by power or whatever you want. You're entitled to your beliefs. But that's not what happened. And as that civilizational order faded, Christianity is fading too.

Since 2016, the “intelligence community,” journos, NGOs, politicians and other managerial elites decided that free speech cannot be tolerated. If left unchecked, discussion leads to “far right” outcomes. This threatens what we call democracy, i.e. rule by media. Top down control was successfully established over the Internet. Every “content” creator is at the mercy of a platform’s content moderation services. The ability to attract an audience is secondary to spreading a message supported by the managerial class.

There are no clear terms of service on any social media sites because that would defeat the purpose. If people had clear rules to obey, they would be obeyed. But subjective rules give maximum power to companies, so that is what exists. In this sense, it's similar to civil rights law, which is now entirely subjective. Is something racist? Well, it depends on someone's feelings. Is a system legitimate? Well, not if it creates a "disparate impact." Your intent doesn't matter, just whether it creates "equality."

The powers that be talk about democracy like it's the end stage of political development or some new thing that people were too stupid to know about. Yet the Founders discussed it extensively - as a danger to be avoided. John Adams described it as something that "murders itself." It's said that Franklin told a citizen that we have a republic, "if you can keep it." Obviously, we did not. It's not that our government is just bigger than what the Founders intended. It's a tyranny almost comically worse than the most paranoid delusions about King George III.

Rhodesia is a great example of how being right means nothing by itself. Zimbabwe's collapse is exactly what Rhodesians predicted. It's not even about black rule - they said don't hand it to Mugabe specifically. UK insisted. Utter collapse - but no change. No lessons learned. It's difficult to imagine a country worse off than Zimbabwe. It was better off under white rule. But is there any possibility of "going back?" No. The UK didn't even get anything from forcing its destruction. Zimbabwe now in Chinese camp. Yet no British rulers learned anything.

I've written a lot about the paradox of race relations. Nonwhites who hate whites are also dependent on them. If whites actually did what progressives suggest and "go back to Europe," nonwhites would follow, alternately begging and threatening. This applies to ideology too. All progressivism even offers is the thrill of punching down on the rural white chuds. Now totally liberated from tradition, what magnificent culture has been produced by the so-called "elite"? Gay men putting dresses on, homeless camps, and complaints about racism. Wow, amazing.

Sam Francis wrote in Leviathan that much of the power of the managerial class comes from its ability to discipline the mass population through media. The Internet briefly led to a flourishing of debate, but it has now empowered a level of centralization once unimaginable. Because the Right - including President Donald Trump, the GOP Congress, and the conservative movement - decided not to oppose deplatforming, there is little real public debate online. Progressives are pushing on an open door. The "trans kids" stuff is just the beginning.

It's time for a 40K thread on the spoilers everyone's talking about. I'll keep it vague. Still, DON'T READ IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED. And don't be a dick. Buy the book if you are going to discuss it. Dan Abnett is a great writer.

smile.amazon.com/End-Death-I-8/… Every primarch can be tempted. Technically, Sanguinius did fall, and was basically saved by one of his sons taking the fall for him. So another one being tempted isn't out of character.

I'm going to try to get a good month to finish my book Nationalists Without A Nation done and out before 2024. I also owe Greg Johnson a response for his critique of me here - counter-currents.com/2022/12/agains…, which I encourage you to read. But below are my key premises. I ask for input. There's a systemic failure in democracy seen from classical times, cited by de Toqueville and in a more fundamental way by Evola. He called it the Regression of the Castes. We'd say it's the Weaponization of Misery. The Left wins because it fails and thus creates more of itself.

The 40K Space Marines are basically child soldiers, basically you when you were 10, only given incredible power and sent on space adventures with your friends without thinking about girls, family, etc. It's similar to this:
amazon.com/One-eyed-God-M… Leaving aside lore, the obvious bad faith of the whole thing, the fact that it destroys the whole idea of loyalty between "sons" to their "fathers," and the grotesque abomination of 800lb "women" soldiers smashing their way through, that's something fundamental to world history.

The thing is, 99% of the far-right are just people radicalized by reality/college. Scrap affirmative action, enforce immigration laws, punish crime, promote patriotism. 99% of us would say, fine, good, we'll never think about this again. But that will never happen. So you end up looking into more radical figures and critiques because, in practical terms, the GOP will never, ever, do something like enforce immigration laws. And if you say "people in America should speak English" you're a Nazi anyway. So screw it, read Evola and go for broke.

It's important to remember that many people see the decline, support it, and want it to continue. It punishes the people they don't like and confirms their social status. Again, crime is up in urban centers and the response from shitlibs is to mock people who say it's a problem. You see this all the time in the immigration debate. In any debate, open borders supporters will quickly move from "America needs immigration" to "American must accept immigration because you evil people have it coming." If it was good for actual Americans, they would oppose it.