Comments on: Why Big Families Are An Advantage

By: Andrew Pearson

Andrew Pearson — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 03:07:01 +0000

Fantastic! I have been running from what is most important. My family. Loved it!

By: Ansible

Ansible — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 03:21:23 +0000

I am not sure if you have seen this Mr. Dampier, I posted it to the reddit comment section as well. Bruce Charlton claims that we are living in an era in which natural selection is pure fertility, meaning that reactionaries ought to have as many children as physically possible.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2014/02/could-we-be-living-in-era-where-average.html

By: Mark Citadel

Mark Citadel — Thu, 12 Feb 2015 02:42:19 +0000

BC, your attitude is exactly the kind that must inform the broad swath of anti-Modernist thought. I would also advise you to be very well acquainted with your 2nd Amendment, if you’re American that is. Bringing kids up in a Traditional manner is fine, but at a certain age you have to make sure they know that the way of life you have taught them is under threat, and that your boys are to React as you have, loyal to the World of Tradition in the face of great adversity.

If you bring your sons up as true men, they will fear no pain that Modernity can impress upon them.

By: BC

BC — Thu, 12 Feb 2015 00:47:01 +0000

Neoreactive, I agree with you that many men are responding to the poisonous disincentives feminism has attached to fatherhood by MGTOW. For many men, it really is the only rational choice, albeit devoid of hope.

My fundamental point is that I want to encourage men to fight the Cathedral and destroy it. The best way to do this is by having a life long marriage and lots of kids. Thus, I suggest the following:
1. Be a man
2. Find a conservative community (yeah, I know these are a needle in a haystack but I found one)
3. Marry a woman willing to follow your lead, use game to help
4. Have lots of kids and bring them up traditionally
5. Win

The Cathedral at its core is anti-human and built upon manifold lies. It will collapse. I and my progeny will be there to help make it happen and to rebuild afterward.

By: Neoreactive

Neoreactive — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 23:55:50 +0000

Having said everything I have about the disincentives of large families in modern progressive societies, I still think large families are worthwhile, both for personal benefits for the individuals involved and also for the future of Western civilisation.

In a nutshell, if we don’t procreate, even under the most oppression regimes imagined by those who have consciously or unconsciously a genocidal motivation, we really do face the end.

The purpose of highlighting the issues men face is because I believe these are the real reasons why men are opting out. Sure, it is certainly fashionable to desire a narcissistic lifestyle, as shown above, without or without an underpinning of liberal ideology, but the question I ask is why?

The answer, I believe, is because of easy sex and the oppressive penalties on fatherhood, and both were the creation of Feminism.

By: Neoreactive

Neoreactive — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 22:47:34 +0000

> by having a large family you will likely gravitate to others where that is accepted

I disagree. I’d say people would already be that way inclined to have large families to begin with. As demonstrated here and elsewhere, there is no point to large families nowadays (perhaps other than fulfilling some religious duty). I cant recall any liberals who’ve suddenly become conservative Catholics, because they accidentally had 8 children.

My point is that large families are actually a massive liability for men. Under the current Marxist-inspired “stick-it-to-the-man” rules, the post-divorce financial burden on men (or the reward for women) increases, generally linearly, the more children you have. The costs on the women don’t increase linearly, but the penalties do for men.

Regardless, let’s assume you’re right, that having more children makes you more conservative, the current progressive rules alone provide an irresistible incentive for your wife to leave, and the more kids you have, the bigger the incentive is.

> I understand the reasons for MGTOW

I’m not a MGTOW advocate, I agree MGTOW is certainly a dead end. MGTOW has no answers. But one thing is certain, the current legal climate men now face, with its perverse incentives that reward all who become ghetto single-mothers, by off-loading the costs of this progressive project to the fathers, has produced a situation where the most rational thing a man can do – is opt out.

By: Lesser Bull

Lesser Bull — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:50:15 +0000

The benefits of extra children increase faster than the costs do. It’s not much harder to have three children than two, or four children than three, and so on.

By: Frank Gappa

Frank Gappa — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 18:10:50 +0000

I have only one child but not because of some Liberal ideology. One child is easy to deal with and I like money. Also, kids are really annoying sapping every last bit of energy out of you. I was at Disney this summer and I glanced over at this guy my age who had 3 kids, the look on his face said it all: exhausted, bitter and beaten down. The wife as big as a house. He looked over at me with a longing for my sunny, breezy, carefree lifestyle. I think if there is ever an ‘emergency situation’ it is easier to relocate, exit, hide quickly as apposed to being completely encumbered with offspring and a fat wife. Better for the three of us to slip away through the escape hatch without being noticed and to feed far fewer mouths when supplies are on the wane.

By: BC

BC — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:41:05 +0000

Your point is valid but misplaced. If a man had one child or eight children, he is still at risk of divorce theft, losing his parental rights, etc. However, by having a large family you will likely gravitate to others where that is accepted. These cultural minorities–conservative Catholics, Mormons, fundamentalists, etc.–also look down on divorce much more so than the common culture. So the advantage is twofold: building up resistance to the Cathedral and giving yourself a better chance of a life long marriage.

I understand the reasons for MGTOW, but just realize that you become a genetic dead end and are refusing to raise children that can fight the Cathedral in the future.

By: Mark Citadel

Mark Citadel — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 02:30:42 +0000

But this is also what transhumanists, propose, Henry. Even Bryce Laliberte had a piece on the advancement of AI in replacing labor, and I don’t think he identifies with transhumanism. He did present the caveat however that he thinks mass war is more likely before any large scale AI displacement of labor.

The way I see it, the problems posed by the advancements in technology, will be solved by unavoidable conflicts created by that technology. Any technology that actually ends up being so advanced that it causes a breakdown in the essential way human societies function (i.e – people having jobs) is not going to last.

Icarus flew a little too close to the sun… and crashed to earth as a fireball.