14 thoughts on “Denmark Abolishes Itself”

1. Will ethnic Danes start making more babies?

   It boggles the mind to consider that ethnic Danes only had 500+ babies last year!

   Is someone feeding them anti-fertility pills? The advent of a new baby into an ethnic Danish family must be considered a miracle of sorts??

   How very sad.

   • daphnya, it shows increase. not absolute numbers. compared to everywhere else in the West, if the Danes are managing to replace themselves they are doing very well. incidentally, if you look at global fertility rates they are dropping nearly everywhere (but slowly in countries, predominantly muslim, where women have very little education).

   • https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/befolkning-og-valg/foedsler/foedsler

2. I’ll give a program that will give a fighting chance to the Danes. Notice this does not involve any draconian measures against immigrants.

   1) Abolish no-fault divorce and enforce alimony, particularly the male paying to the female.

   To have more babies, women need to start having children early, and with the absence of alimony, a woman feels that she is vulnerable by not building career skills when acting as a stay-at-home mother. Alimony recognizes the contribution of the woman in a symbiotic pair.

   2) Institute complete freedom-of-association, including the right of housing developers to exclude people on racial or religious grounds, as long as they are not receiving public subsidies. Clubs may exclude people, employers may hire whomever they wish and schools may choose on the basis of ethnicity, social status, or whatever basis they wish, again as long as they do it with private, and not public, funds..

   This gives the opportunity for healthy Danes to associate with healthy Danes, including the ability of parents to put their children in an environment which contains only eligible mates for their children. There is scientific evidence that a high load of mutant genes affects not only looks, but ability to function and the ability to bear children. By allowing a highly-selective environment for healthy Danes of child-bearing age, you increase the proportion of healthy individuals able and willing to have children. I make the proviso that these places have to be privately funded because it is not fair to have people pay taxes to subsidize places that exclude them.

   Eliminate public support of medical treatment and housing, including and especially mothers and expectant mothers. If the migrants are disproportionately likely to be dependent on public welfare, this would affect the survival of many of the immigrant children. This is another selection pressure in favor of Danes with a high proportion of functional genes. To be fair, this measure would have no affect on immigrants if the immigrants themselves were as productive as Danes. The higher the proportion of healthy genes, the more likely the Danish mother and father would be to have and support children.

   3) Get rid of public education. Doing so would not only allow frank discussion of how healthy it is for young adults to be discriminatory in the mates and potential mates they select, but would allow parents to further control the surroundings of their children at a vulnerable age.

   I emphasize that none of these measures can be considered to be actions against immigrants or anyone else. In fact, instituting these points. the Danes could have a far higher rate of increase than they do now, even if the migrants and migrant stock have children at the rate they do currently. If the migrants are acting as parasites, drawing out more welfare and support than they put in, the measures might affect their life style and the survival of their children. Hopefully, those who feel aggrieved at not receiving the benefits they expected will go back to their native countries, where they can get the support they need.

   • “Alimony recognizes the contribution of the woman in a symbiotic pair.”

     …or, as many men who have to pay alimony would tell you, alimony makes them slaves to their former wifes who took their property, took away their children, and now make them work and pay them even though they hate them…

     There used to be one big institution that protected mothers from the vulnerabilities of motherhood: It was called “Marriage”.

     • Yeah. I recognize your problems. Notice I said to do away with no-fault divorce, which presumably means that a woman can’t get a divorce with alimony simply because she feels like it.

       But, the problem you bring up is absolutely real, particularly with the huge advantage women have in any legal action against males. My proposal was made in an attempt to create a fertile environment for couples to have and raise children. I don’t have a ready answer for your very important counter-example.

   • Your arguments in # 2 were the ones of Thilo Sarrazin in 2009, Germany is doing away with itself. He said it would be a benefit for society to give 50,000$ to a young mother with university education for every birth instead of pampering unproductive growth in the lower classes( I beg your pardon for the wording).
     To abolish alimony by ways of tax-funded welfare would certainly encourage young women to scrutinize more thoroughly what type of man to associate with and a more rigid enforcement of the fathers alimony would make the males think twice if ” your place or mine”.
     The danish aspect pointed out here has a positive side to it, however longterm: when the muslims are in majority and have transformed the country into what Trump called &!%¥🚽 holes ,they will leave for greener gras.

     • Thank you, but I would oppose the idea of government paying directly for women to have babies, particularly based on university education, which is kind of an IQ marker. The logical conclusion of that direction is to have government pay women to have babies, the amount being dependent on the IQ of the mother.

       I think that direct action for the government to encourage having babies and raising the level of the population would have the same effect as any other social engineering objective of any government: it would screw it up entirely.

       In the first place, this does nothing to encourage a stable, two-parent household for raising children. In the second place, there are other characteristics besides IQ that are very important. Government bureaucrats are highly-verbal (a major component of IQ) but can’t do anything. You could be subsidizing more and more bureaucrats and gender-studies professors. The East Asians (Chinese) are high-IQ, but even with the huge strides Chinese are only recently making, our country is far more productive and pleasant than theirs. As the saying goes “If you’re so smart, why ain’t you rich?”.

       I’m not so sure the university-educated should be encouraged at the expense of the “lower classes”. It depends if you’re talking about welfare-takers, laborers, skilled craftsmen, merchants or small farmer-businessmen. I have no more confidence that government can navigate the complex waters of selecting desirable people to procreate than I have that government can actually build and run all the factories and enterprises for a vibrant economy. The role of government is to create a fair and secure superstructure, and get out of the way.

       I sound like a libertarian, but I do believe there is a place for protected markets. Steven Bannon, in a brilliant interview with Mike Cernovich, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH_McmhRw3U asserts that China is in an economic war with the US, and one component of China’s strategy is to deindustrialize, through subsidies, large parts of the US. For sure, there’s a place there for protected markets through tariffs by the government.

       • Thanks. I always appreciate your comments to mine.Sometimes, I tend to verbal gunslinging and accept reprimands.
         Indeed, there is a eugenic touch to it.(cf. Julian- not Aldous- Huxley) and the consequences of increasing high IQs to higher ones through education can enhance the proliferation of a sort of Mandarin- class structures.ie. gender and bureaucrats. And to use your punchline invertedly: I am not rich, so I must be dumb. Well, sort of.

3. this was always the plan of your communist politicians. they tell you not to have children, they promote abortion, they pay the people they want to have children to have more through the welfare state. this is the conquest through colonization the communists started forty years ago after they gave up on conquest through military conquest and revolution.

4. There are only 5 1/2 million Danes and only 10 million Swedes. These are astonishingly small populations. Bleeding heart libs will go overboard to save snail darters and let entire ancient peoples with their own history art and language die in a matter of generations.

5. Hi Baron, something goes wrong, I cite from the article:

   “…During the third quarter of 2018 there were 499,903 immigrants of non-Western background and their descendants in Denmark…”

   “…The current number of immigrants and their descendants is 250,000, i.e. a little less than 5% of the population…”

   If we take the first statistic from the article, they are already nearly 10%, so the end is closer than we think.

   • You’re quite right; I missed that little tidbit. That may make it worse.

     I’ll adjust the program code and re-run it tomorrow, and then post a new table. The recalculation is not straightforward, because the larger culture-enricher population actually reduces the rate of increase for the migrants. We’ll see how it turns out.

     • and would it be possible to distinguish between the different groups of ” non- western” immigrants? Last time I checked, Koreans or Japanese never make it into the papers for attacking police or paramedics( do you have that in the States at all?)

Comments are closed.