I've had to correct really smart people many times on this, so I'll be doing it again here. It's confusing to me that most haven't figured this out: demographics is destiny is total nonsense, at least in the way that it's constantly promoted (nowadays, modernity, etc). I've made many posts on this before, but the quick answer is that population booms create relative dysgenics, and that's just what we are going through. If you are from any race this is happening. But what people miss here is that the current levels of population via what has happened socially, materially, and from the money printer are in fact unsustainable. A quick glance at the national debt, the interest payments on the deficit, and the propping up for 70-80 year old people, or older, with all of these fake payments (SSA, CMS, etc) will show you this. With the coming conclusion to this soon, even if something like BTC backs it to keep it somewhat sustainable, you'll still see massive falloff in reproduction by most around the world. What is left will still be the most successful traits, largely speaking.
You're conflating two separate but interrelated issues: the impact of dysgenic trends within population booms and the geopolitical necessity of maintaining demographic primacy in a given territory. I am not disagreeing with much of what you say, but there is more to it.
You're right that unchecked population growth can lead to dysgenic effects when resources, education, and opportunity are unevenly distributed. Historically population booms favored the survival of individuals who can reproduce under the least selective pressures, potentially amplifying traits that are maladaptive in the long term. However this does not negate the fact that demographics in the aggregate
are destiny in a different sense: the ability of a group to maintain cultural, political, and territorial control.
While racial sustainability and quality matter sheer, numbers still hold sway in terms of political power and influence. A population that dwindles too far regardless of its genetic fitness risks losing control of its territory and institutions to larger, more populous groups. This isn't a hypothetical; it's evident in regions where declining native birth rates and high immigration rates have caused drastic shifts in the cultural and political makeup. A society that prioritizes dysgenics and eugenics to the exclusion of demographics risks being replaced wholesale by more fertile populations.
Dysgenics is an issue, but it doesn’t outweigh the existential threat of demographic replacement. A population needs to maintain a critical mass to continue existing as a viable entity. Even a "genetically fit" population is vulnerable if it's vastly outnumbered. History is full of examples where smaller, more advanced societies were overtaken by larger, less developed ones. Also not all population booms are equally dysgenic. Societies that emphasize education, national values, spiritual and racial cohesion can experience growth without sacrificing quality. The problem arises when societal structures fail to direct growth in ways that benefit this long-term stability.
The global population boom has indeed been propped up by unsustainable economic, environmental, and social systems, but the collapse of these systems won't magically leave behind the “most successful traits.” Societal collapses are indiscriminate and chaotic often favoring those who can adapt to short-term instability rather than those with desirable long-term traits. Populations that shrink too rapidly may not recover, as we’ve seen with Japan’s demographic crisis or the challenges faced by Eastern European nations after the fall of the Soviet Union, especially with the war now and the dumping of millions of Asiatics, Indians, Muslims, and Africans in Slavic homelands.
Our worry is more based on what we think possible, when in reality we inherited a pretty nice world (until now) that brought much convenience, but also brought very little future for wives, mothers and children, even for pretty darn successful and physically talented/gifted men.
A successful man raising a wife and kids shouldn’t have to do it alone. Historically, families didn’t exist in isolation they thrived within a network of racially, culturally, and geographically similar people who shared values, traditions, and mutual support. Extended families, neighbors, and community groups worked together to ease the burdens of child-rearing, economic hardship, and societal challenges. This communal system provided a safety net and a sense of belonging that allowed individuals to thrive within a larger structure.
In the atomized, hyper-individualistic society we live in now, that network has all but disappeared. Families are left to fend for themselves cut off from the intergenerational wisdom and support that once made raising children less daunting. When a population shrinks or fragments these networks weaken even further. A lone family no matter how wealthy or capable, is more vulnerable without the reinforcement of a larger community aligned with their values.
Numbers matter here because a thriving population provides the critical mass needed to sustain these networks. When people share a common identity, goals, and way of life, they create a feedback loop of support that benefits everyone, from young families to the elderly. A shrinking or fragmented population simply cannot maintain this level of cohesion, leaving families isolated and overwhelmed.
Atomized, individualistic families are a death knell for Europeans and Westerners. Modernity’s jewish emphasis on personal success, careerism, and consumerism has convinced people that family life is an individual pursuit rather than a collective endeavor. This mindset is unsustainable because it forces families to shoulder all the burdens of survival without the support structures that made previous generations successful.
Worse this individualism creates a feedback loop of despair. When young people see the struggles of isolated families they are less inclined to start families themselves, perpetuating the demographic decline. How many people do we all know that are fearful of children because of silly reasons like this? Meanwhile, immigrant populations with stronger communal bonds (in-group preference without guilt) and higher fertility rates fill the void, reshaping the landscape with their filth.
The return to a collective organized identity for all Aryans that falls primarily along two lines, faith and race, ideally both at the same time, is the only way out of this hole. This applies to eastern Aryans as well like Georgians, Slavic Russians, Armenians, and Persian Iranians, they too are a spiritual people who are subject to the same curse of secularism as the western Europeans, Americans, and Australians that cripples us all to parasites above and below, but when they unite along these lines, history is written and empires are built.
