FEMINISM and predatory economics have had their inevitable (and desired) result. The birthrate among Americans, especially among whites, has declined. The solution promoted by the government and mass media? More immigration. You’ve heard about it ad nauseam.

But leaving aside the immense cultural consequences, this idea of using “migrants” to make up for a loss of native workers does not make sense economically. About 50 percent of immigrants are on welfare and they overwhelmingly come from countries with weak economies. They were not able to transform their own countries into success stories so how can they transform ours? (It’s also uncharitable, draining other countries of motivated, hard-working citizens.) That’s not to say immigrants, even illegal immigrants, have not contributed immense labor and good to this country. They have. They definitely have.

But a better solution to population decline in Europe and America at this particular point would be to do the exact opposite: Send millions of recent immigrants home and restore families, offering economic incentives for marriage and for women to stay home. If women in Africa can afford to have five children, why can’t women here? I do not suggest cruelty or banishment.

Let’s do what Africans are doing and send our migrants home. Mass deportation, in a gradual and humane form, may seem impossible, but consider:

People act like mass deportations are impossible but Algeria kicked out a million Whites (~12% of the population) in a couple of years after they gained independence [1] [2].

Similarly, Tunisia and Morocco each kicked out a quarter of a million Whites (~7% and ~5 of their populations, respectively) [3] [4] [5] [6].

Huge demographic turnovers can occur in the blink of an eye. Europeans were in North Africa for over a century but most non-Whites haven’t even lived in the West for a single decade. They could be sent home as quickly as they arrived.

Peacefully deporting them would, theoretically, be easy and inexpensive. Simply banning them from accessing welfare and making them pay to use public services (e.g. healthcare in Europe) would cause many to immediately self-deport.

Since over 50% of immigrants are on welfare, the money saved could then be used to finance deportation logistics. Even paying them a lump sum to leave would be cheaper than keeping them here. (Thuletide)

The goal of deportation shouldn’t be a racially pure society with no diversity, but a much more homogenous one, where the incentive to “be fruitful and multiply” is not stifled. Deportation needn’t, and shouldn’t, be cruel. Immigrants can be offered economic incentives to create a better life back home. It’s a win/win situation. Who are we to say that other countries should lose major portions of their populations so that we can have more waiters and farm hands? Really, the arrogance and, well, racism is glaring.

This is a solution, however, you will not see in the news.

— Comments —

George Weinbaum writes:

You missed a big one: Stalin’s expulsion of 10-18 million ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe during 1944-1950.

It can be done.

Laura writes:

But, of course, Stalin is not a model to follow in this department. I was thinking mostly of financial incentives.

Please follow and like us: