Killing us softly with their song...

If any Christians still need convincing that fruitful apple trees and grain fields and dairy herds and women's wombs are God's blessings, and that He denies these blessings to those who defy His authority, this from today's Wall Street Journal concerning the growing crisis of sterility within the pro-baby-killing, pro-sodomy, pro-euthanasia, pro-sex education Democrat crowd. From which I take this priceless quote:

Maybe the scales are tipping to the neoconservative, homogenous right in our culture simply because they tend not to give much of a damn for the ramifications of wanton breeding and environmental destruction and pious sanctimony, whereas those on the left actually seem to give a whit for the health of the planet and the dire effects of overpopulation.

Reminds me of a cartoon in the latest New Yorker that hit my funny bone earlier today. The picture is of two modern-day prophets picketing the streets of New York City, one older man with wild hair and a long flowing beard and the other a middle-aged woman who appears frazzled and maybe neurotic. The title above the cartoon is "Turf War on West 49th Street." The man's sign says, "The end is near for religious reasons" and the woman's, "The end is near for ecological reasons."

Adding to the inanity all around us, I say "Make love, not war." Glad I got that off my chest.

(Thanks, Dave.)


Reminds me of Mark Steyn's essay from January's New Criterion, "It's the Demography, Stupid." Western Europe is so enlightened that it's no longer reproducing itself, and America is just barely doing so.

"Some countries are well above [replacement fertility rate, which is 2.1]: the global fertility leader, Somalia, is 6.91, Niger 6.83, Afghanistan 6.78, Yemen 6.75. Notice what those nations have in common?"

That kind of fruitfulness may be God's blessing upon them, but, going along with Steyn's essay, I wonder if it won't turn out to prove a judgment on the rest of us.

Doug Wilson had an interesting quote on his blog. If you take 100 liberals vs 100 conservatives, the liberals have 147 children while the conservatives have 208. Given a couple of years, the liberals will lose the vote due to being outbred.

...and if you take 100 Muslims, they are having ______ children?

While we're quoting the superbly quotable Steyn, I'll add one here about Western Europe's near-term future because of its birth rates:

"Seventeen European nations are now at what demographers call "lowest-low" fertility - 1.3 births per woman, the point at which you're so far down the death spiral you can't pull out. In theory, those countries will find their population halving every 35 years or so. In practice, it will be quicker than that, as the savvier youngsters figure there's no point sticking around a country that's turned into an undertaker's waiting room. So large parts of the western world are literally dying - and, in Europe, the successor population to those aging French and Dutch and Belgians is already in place. "

I highly recommend the entire address from which this was taken. You may read it here:

It's fascinating -- the way slow-motion train wrecks are fascinating -- to watch Europe implode demographically. Europe is doing in the face of inflowing Muslims what ancient Rome did in the face of inflowing Germans, whose women were especially fecund: it's committing ethnic suicide.

I used to think I wouldn't live long enough to see this happen, though I was sure my children would. But, Lord willing, if the mortality tables are even grossly on target for my age/sex profile, I may see this happen with my own eyes!

Dad, Just wanted to say "hi" from South Africa and add another country to your stats for today... we love it here, talk to you soon.

Have you ever noticed, that sin is super-rational? Oh, we say it's "irrational", but no one accuses the Dutch or the French of that, at least, not in person. The death spiral of Europe is the absolute logical conclusion to a country steeped in Modernism. It is precisely the finale predicted by Chesterton a century ago when he heard the overture of Modernism. (You know, Beethoven's 9th, Wagner, Nietzche...)

And have you ever noticed that despite the widespread recognition of the problem, there's nothing they can do about it? Oh sure, there's the European tax incentive to have more kids. Heck, they'll even give them school scholarships. But it seems to make no difference. When my Austrian colleague finally had a baby, he suddenly realized how richly rewarded I was for 5. He still could only manage one, with day care from age 1 to help with the task.

And have you ever noticed how Modernists elevate Reason and Intelligence to the one true Virtue? What is the very worst epithet you can say about a political figure? Bastard? Mother was a slut? No that's the Moor on the French soccer team, not a Modernist. No, the very worst thing you can call him (think Bush) is a dropout, a fool, an incompetent, bumbling inarticulate idiot. So then, why is this lemming-like march off the demographic cliff so hard to understand? Because this incontrovertible disaster remains the unabashed smartest decision they freely acknowledge. What was it Paul said "Claiming to be wise, they became fools..."

I used to think that education was the answer to sin. But with the wrong metaphysics, logic invariably takes us where we do not wish to go. Now I think that sin is the answer to education. In fact, maybe Muslims are on to something, maybe procreation is the answer to sin. Maybe when Moses said that the sins of the fathers go down to the third and fourth generation, he meant that this was all the generations that survived, and then they went extinct. Sin, I am convinced, has a lot in common with genetically transmitted diseases.

Maybe it's irrational after all.

"It's fascinating -- the way slow-motion train wrecks are fascinating -- to watch Europe implode demographically. Europe is doing in the face of inflowing Muslims what ancient Rome did in the face of inflowing Germans, whose women were especially fecund: it's committing ethnic suicide."

And what, pray tell, does Bill think America is doing? Or is it only "ethnic suicide" when it's Muslims replacing white people?

Boy, that's a really funny quotation. The one in the original post, I mean.

You know, parts of the world may be overpopulated, but the U.S. just isn't one of them.

"And what, pray tell, does Bill think America is doing? Or is it only 'ethnic suicide' when it's Muslims replacing white people?"

Well, Stewart, if you had read Steyn's article, you would have learned what America and Australia are doing. It's nothing like what's happening in Europe. We're still above the replacement rate (though only barely at the moment). And, the hopeful news for American and Australia is that we get to watch the other nations go over the falls well before we start on that same suicidal ride, leaving (for the present) the possibility that we could repent and avoid what's happening in Europe.

And, yes, it is ethnic suicide when others besides Muslims replace white people. In Texas, it's Hispanics replaicing white people, for the reasons Steyn lays out -- Hispanic women have babies rather than abort them. White Texas women abort far, far more than Hispanic women. And black women may be aborting more of their babies than white women. Anybody can, in principle, commit ethnic suicide. It's been done before. It's happening in Europe and Japan right now.

Steyn points to Japan as the only place on the earth where one can watch the population death spiral taking place in a "pure" form, because they have no inflowing alter-ethnic population. They're simply diminishing, last year being the first since record keeping began in that nation to record more deaths than births, for a net population decline, which will now accellerate every year, because their birth rate is in the death-spiral range.

"Well, Stewart, if you had read Steyn's article, you would have learned what America and Australia are doing."

I don't need to read Steyn's article. I understand exactly what's going on in America.

Can anyone tell me the difference between Fr. Bill lamenting the "ethnic suicide" of white people being "replaced" by Mexicans in America, and what the kinists were saying a few months ago on this very blog?


It must be singularly pleasant to have one's mind so settled that you do not need to consult other's words to know what he meant by them.

Pity you won't read Steyn's address, if only to compare what he thinks is going on in America, and Europe, with what you're so confident is going on.

You have, however, read my words here, and misread them egregiously. There is no lament expressed or implied in a single syllable. Nor rejoicing. Just the facts. It's interesting to see what you are making of them, and imputing to others who cite them. It tells me interesting things about you, and nothing about the facts themselves.

Equally egregious, and suggestive, is your substitution of "Mexican" for "Hispanic" in alluding to my remarks. The terms are not co-extensive, at least not in Texas politics. Maybe they are in the America about which you are so confidently informed.

Bill, I hope you'll understood if some of us thought "ethnic suicide" had a slightly negative connotation, and that you seemingly defined "white" as an ethnicity. And the vast majority of hispanics in Texas are in fact Mexicans.

But, I'm sure your comment will be used by the "kinists" (HEY SCOREBORED! Does everyone realize you barely live in the South? At least that's better than Badonicus, since he lives in Ohio) as proof that we're all trying to "suppress the truth" that us white people are in dire need of saving and that at any moment we're all going to be overtaken by black people, or jews, or maybe some form of black jews.


If you tell me that conversations and debates of which I have no knowledge, in which I have no interest, are imputing meanings to my words which I myself did not invest in them, I'll accept your report at face value. I'll also say there's little I can do to correct the problem, short of spending a lot of time learning about something which you suggest is very unsavory. I think I'll pass and leave you in your confusion. It won't hurt you or me very much.

You are quite wrong about Hispanics in Texas. I suppose those from Mexico are numerically larger that others here illegally, but I have no information that they are a majority. There are large numbers from Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and San Salvador. And, of course, there are Hispanic Texans who are bona fide American citizens. It is naive in the extreme to lump all these together and suppose their political, social, and religious allegiances are all identical. In any event, to say Hispanics in Texas are "mostly" from Mexico is incorrect.

As to "white" being an ethnicity, it is officially so on every governmental form I've filled out in the past decade. Occasionally, they'll allow one to check "caucasian," but "white" seems to be the standard term. I didn't define "white" as an ethnicity. It's a socially linguistic given. I make no apologies for using "white" as an ethnicity.

Finally, I first encountered the term "ethnic suicide" in a book entitled _Sex and Power in History_ (Dell, 1974) by Amaury de Reincourt. I reproduce here the concluding paragraph of his analysis of the effect of feminism and sexual license on Roman society:

"Unconscious victims of unwarranted emphasis put by Greco-Roman culture on exclusively male values, "modern" Roman women looked down on childbearing as unworthy of their talents. Unfortunately for them, other women within and without the empire remained immensely fertile. While barbarians and Orientals increased their total numbers at a fast tempo, Italy and Greece saw their populations dwindle. Even Roman Gaul was contaminated by the disease. It had all started with the feminist movement in the upper classes; with the progress of democratic equality under the Caesarian Empire, it had spread downward and outward, to reach the urban proletariat and the rural peasantry. Infanticide was widespread, and sexual lewdness undoubtedly lowered men and women's fertility; marriage was frequently deferred or avoided altogether. At the tail end of this evolution, the western Roman Empire was rapidly becoming, in population terms, an empty shell. The Romans actually committed ethnic suicide.

"The collapse of the western Roman Empire was the inevitable consequence. Fast-breeding Teutonic populations eventually overwhelmed it and plunged Europe into the Dark Ages." [pp. 126-127]

What is wrong with the term "ethnic suicide?" I see no pejorative dimension to it. Admitted, the meaning of "suicide" is stretched in the phrase to name something like a societal death-wish, but English permits that sort of thing without intending prejudice of any sort.

De Reincourt's description of the demise of Greece and Rome matches Steyn's description of the impending demise of decadent Western European society. No one should be surprised at this. Nor offended, unless one subscribes to the social, political, and religious values which are generating and sustaining the death wish.

60% of hispanics in America are from Mexico, so I'd be surprised if Texas somehow bucked that trend.

Anyway, my point is that, contrary to what "kinists"/white supremacists say, America isn't being dismantled the way Europe is.

"Anyway, my point is that, contrary to what 'kinists'/white supremacists say, America isn't being dismantled the way Europe is."

I wouldn't want to argue that America IS being dismantled. I suppose what one considers dismantling makes a difference here. As far as cultural dismantling (however you construe this) is concerned, not even Europe is being dismantled, yet. When Muslims come into their own politically in a Western European nation, especially if they become an electoral king-maker, or the king himself -- well, it's going to be interesting to see if the developments in that country mirror those in the old Byzantine Empire. Norte Dame a mosque, perhaps?

In this respect, the key difference in the way the demographics are shifting in Europe and the United States is NOT that the whites are diminishing in favor of non-whites. That feature is the same in both areas, though more pronounced in Europe at the moment. In America, however, the surging Hispanic population (from legal or illegal immigration, or from mere fecundity) represents a net resurgence of fundamental Western values, in this case informed by south-of-the-border Catholicism.

In my own North Texas environs, I see evidence of this every time I wander around the grocery store, particularly in the early evening hours. Home-grown ethnic whites (caucasians, whatever you wish to call them) are present as individuals: individual men, individual women, individual youngsters, particularly the latter. Hispanics -- mostly poor, labor-class folk -- are always present as husband-wife-children groupings. These are the ones, I think, who are destined to inherit Texas.

And I am grateful their social and religious values are so much closer to mine than, say, those of Muslims.

I think America (to a lesser extent than Europe) is slowly killing itself because people have bought the lie of the population controllers and because they want a little more of the bling bling for themselves. And it may be God's punishment of these lands for disregarding His word that blessed is the quiver full of children. Keith, please don't commit the fallacy of ascribing those who believe this to dastardly motives; this is exactly what the Left does in every debate on this and other topics. It's tiresome. Other than the Kinist imports, I'm pretty sure everyone on this blog despises kinism as unbiblical and irrelevant to this discussion.

I saw a border policeman saying that something like 120,000 people apprehended in the last year at the border were "Other Than Mexican." People from the middle east, Pakistan, etc. The lack of desire by our senators and president to protect our borders is a shameful abandonment of their responsibility.

"Other than the Kinist imports, I'm pretty sure everyone on this blog despises kinism as unbiblical and irrelevant to this discussion."

Maybe everyone who comments, but not everyone who reads it. I just wanted to ruin their fun before they posted a link to this page.

I also think "population control" is a cop-out. Most people who have no kids, in my experience, do it because they love free time and they love money. I came across a book a few months ago called "The Joy of Not Parenting" (or something like that), and it was filled with pithy comparisons between childless and childed life ("if you have a baby, you spend your Friday nights cleaning up vomit -- if you don't have a baby, you take a wine-tasting class!", etc.)

We're out-procreating them at a prodigious rate, and yet they call us sexually repressed.

Add new comment