Should 20-40% of Male Babies Be Aborted?

[Tsar]

@Outcast9428

Not my idea to mass murder male babies..
Another one of Tsar's fantasy..

It's not a fantasy, it's a realistic option.

The technology already exists to do all three things:

1. Abortion
2. IVF
3. Create injections so men injected with it no longer produce semen that's viable for sons. This means they can only produce daughters. (This is the only one that requires research but the technology already exists)

[Natural_Born_Cynic]

@Outcast9428

Not my idea to mass murder male babies..
Another one of Tsar's fantasy..

It's not a fantasy, it's a realistic option.

The technology already exists to do all three things:

1. Abortion
2. IVF
3. Create injections so men injected with it no longer produce semen that's viable for sons. This means they can only produce daughters. (This is the only one that requires research but the technology already exists)

Well once the A.I gain sentience and go Skynet, we all be extinct anyway.

[Tsar]

We don't need 20%-40% of the men.

Imagine there's a society with 1,000,000 men. Would killing of 400,000 men really make any difference to how that society functions and advances? No! It would actually function better.

Guys would be celebrated, respected, easily build lives, and start families.

Employers would need to higher men.

Incomes would rise. Crime would decrease.

There's many benefits to having a cull of males, and it should happen either by changing nature or removing a percentage of males before they're born.

The only reason why excess men would be favored is to have expendable numbers to fight in wars to conquer new territory and build empires. That doesn't exist anymore so without eliminating excess men, as in them dying, some other way must be implemented to remove the 20%-40% of excess men.

I agree with this. A significant percentage of the male population isn't even necessary for the functioning or advancement of society. This is only going to accelerate as automation and AI technologies continue to advance exponentially in the upcoming decades. In light of this, a significant portion of men will be rendered nothing more than "useless eaters" if they're not so already. There will no longer be much need for a large populace of unintelligent semi-retarded serfs to do the menial jerbs of present-day society (advanced robotics and AI will take care of most of these). A considerably smaller population of intelligent and well-constituted men will suffice.

@Natural_Born_Cynic mentioned the police force and military, but even in the most militarized modern nations those institutions comprise a small minority of the population. Even if women outnumber men 2:1, there will still be enough men to operate an effective police force and military. Moreover, the military is going to become increasingly technologized towards the midway point of this century. Expect remote-controlled unmanned drones, aircrafts and even terminator-style military robots to take precedence in futuristic warfare. Once robotics become advanced enough, they'll make these kind of things.

If it is possible to change the sex ratio of births in the female direction in a medically safe manner, then I think that it would be a good idea. We no longer live in times of constant warfare or extreme competition for resources. There is no reason why nature should continue to produce more males than females. A greater ratio of females would result in an increase in the value of men, largely solve the incel problem (provided that the men of the future are willing to cultivate masculine virtue and actually behave like men) and nullify the effects of feminism. It would also allow some men to have two or more women in accordance with our natural masculine polygamist instincts.

It would also be best to limit the number of children born to each female in order to keep the population at a relatively low number and avoid massive resource depletion. In the hypermodern age of high technology and advanced AI, we are able to favor quality over quantity. We are no longer living in some barbaric and war-torn primitive world where the optimal procreative strategy is to pump out as many potential warriors as possible. Fewer kids born to high-quality parents and with a lot of educational investment would be the best option.

Polygyny was a thing because men use to die in wars. Men are capable of loving multiple females equally. A girl cannot love multiple men equally. A girl can also only birth offspring for one guy. A guy can father offspring with multiple females. Also, not every man is suited for monogamy and it's in the nature of some guys to want polygynous relationships. The best way to meet the needs of polygynous men is to have excess females. It's immoral for men to have more than one female if other men can't have one, which is why I mostly agree with @Outcast9248, but if there's excess females, then I think it's completely acceptable for some men to have polygynous relationships if they require it. Also, some girls are naturally bisexual, so it would benefit them to have a polygynous relationship where they can be married to a guy and have MFF threesomes or just "girl fun" in the context of a polygynous relationship.

Monogamy only worked when men would die in wars and older men could (and would) marry youthful and occasionally the freshest newly blossomed females. It also made it so younger guys couldn't get a girlfriend or engage in courtship until they were 22-26, in some cases older, but they would be assured a youthful virgin girl who was fertile and in her prime. Girls would be married between 18-20 maximum, occasionally younger than that age range. That's how stability was ensured. That and men dying in wars. 105 males per 95 females has always been the norm. That required wars and a very specific system of courtship to maintain and work. Monogamy also only works if everyone buys into it and girls are virgins for a guy.

Wiping out all the worthless and useless excess in the world is necessary. Quality people are much better than quantity. If I wanted to restore the White Race to it's former glory, first I must turn my swords against the White Race themselves. The Jewish Elite only dominant through their oppression of excess men and their brainwashed White collaborators who are nothing more than NPC serfs. A cull of Whites is necessary for the restoration of the White Race, and removing 20%-40% of males from the birth ratio enhances the quality of life for all males alive and that will be born.

I think the injection option where 20%-40% of men will be injected with it to render all male sperm unviable, and all their viable sperm will be for female offspring.

The only real testing that must be done to ensure that it doesn't make the the daughters incapable of producing sons and that their sons can have sons with a girl. Once it's been tested, it will be possible to implement an injection so 20%-40% of men can only have daughters.

We're already at the point where most of human civilization has been automated. The future will make it more advanced.

Now, one man and 10 machines can do a job that would require hundreds of people.

Counting by hand, complex calculations, digging a new mine, engaging enemy soldiers, etc.

Nations with purely conventional weapons cannot deter NATO unless they have a loyal ally willing to also intervene that can match NATO.

The future military power is about high-tech weapons, drone superiority, nuclear weapons, and soon robot soldiers. In the future, even human soldiers won't be required by most militaries, except for certain roles and ceremonial roles.

[Outcast9428]

@Outcast9428

Not my idea to mass murder male babies..
Another one of Tsar's fantasy..

No worries I’m not saying it was. I’m just stunned by some of the people on this forum. When I look like a moderate standing next to these guys… Something is wrong.

[Outcast9428]

@Tsar Why can’t you just accept a system that has been historically proven to work? Like Renaissance Europe or the 1950s? Why do you always have to come up with something that is utterly bizarre, contradictory, and morally questionable?

[Tsar]

@Tsar Why can’t you just accept a system that has been historically proven to work? Like Renaissance Europe or the 1950s? Why do you always have to come up with something that is utterly bizarre, contradictory, and morally questionable?

The 1950s didn't work because it was the first major phase of degeneracy, the decline of human civilization, and it didn't work.

The Renaissance happened purely because of mass death caused by a massive and lethal pandemic. It might have worked but only for that time period in a specific part of the world, and the deaths caused abundance resources, plentiful jobs and high wages, and they already had mass buy in and sociocultural cohesion with a functional social contract.

Human Civilization as it exists now everywhere in the world must be completely annihilated in it's current form and recreated with a radical new system to achieve a true and near-perfect civilization. Burn the rotten systems to ashes and create a new system from the ground up. Humanity cannot change out of a sense of goodness when they can't even accept what's good for them. Also, a system cannot survive if it doesn't have balance. There's honestly no nation or culture that I would allow to exist as it does now if I had unlimited power. I would dismantle everything and create something better. I would "break the wheel" like Daenerys Targaryen on Game of Thrones. A traditional world with a Jahr Null.

Jahr Null! Year 0!

[Natural_Born_Cynic]

@Outcast9428

Not my idea to mass murder male babies..
Another one of Tsar's fantasy..

No worries I’m not saying it was. I’m just stunned by some of the people on this forum. When I look like a moderate standing next to these guys… Something is wrong.

I though I've seen it all in Happier Abroad, but Tsar's views are utterly bizarre even to me...completely wacky. This coming from a social misfit like me.
But at least I had a good laugh.

[Tsar]

@Outcast9428 The reason why my National Socialism is different from the main version of National Socialism is because mine is more aligned with a variant form of National Socialism called Strasserism when it relates to economic policy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism

[Outcast9428]

Human Civilization as it exists now everywhere in the world must be completely annihilated in it's current form and recreated with a radical new system to achieve a true and near-perfect civilization. Burn the rotten systems to ashes and create a new system from the ground up.

This is why I said that it’s hard to distinguish you from an extreme leftist. The primary philosophy behind traditionalism is the idea that we return to a system that’s been proven to work. We replicate what worked in the past in order to solve modern problems.

With this whole post, you’re basically denying that the past actually worked and are saying the only solution is to do something completely new. That’s progressivism in a nutshell… Nothing in the past worked so we need a new system. You’ve gone so far to the right that you’re more like an extreme left winger then a traditionalist. Although there is some room for innovation among reactionary/traditional ideology… This is not even adhering to the basic values of traditionalism.

[Tsar]

@Outcast9428

Not my idea to mass murder male babies..
Another one of Tsar's fantasy..

No worries I’m not saying it was. I’m just stunned by some of the people on this forum. When I look like a moderate standing next to these guys… Something is wrong.

I though I've seen it all in Happier Abroad, but Tsar's views are utterly bizarre even to me...completely wacky. This coming from a social misfit like me.
But at least I had a good laugh.

My views aren't bizarre. They're legitimate and radical.

[fschmidt]

There's honestly no nation or culture that I would allow to exist as it does now if I had unlimited power.

What is wrong with traditional Anabaptists and Arkians?

[Tsar]

Human Civilization as it exists now everywhere in the world must be completely annihilated in it's current form and recreated with a radical new system to achieve a true and near-perfect civilization. Burn the rotten systems to ashes and create a new system from the ground up.

This is why I said that it’s hard to distinguish you from an extreme leftist. The primary philosophy behind traditionalism is the idea that we return to a system that’s been proven to work. We replicate what worked in the past in order to solve modern problems.

With this whole post, you’re basically denying that the past actually worked and are saying the only solution is to do something completely new. That’s progressivism in a nutshell… Nothing in the past worked so we need a new system. You’ve gone so far to the right that you’re more like an extreme left winger then a traditionalist. Although there is some room for innovation among reactionary/traditional ideology… This is not even adhering to the basic values of traditionalism.

It's neo-traditionalism because I am not a leftist at all. I want to completely end leftists and progressives. I care about the traditional values, not preserving the nations.

I favor destroying all notions of democracy, republic government, capitalism, marxism, and destroy all the institutions subverted by the Jewish Elite. All nations that have become controlled by Jewish leadership or acquiesced to Jewish control will lose their rights to even have a national flag or to have their cultures. Maybe once they have been corrected, they can once again have a nationality and a flag, but I would have all subverted nationalities reduced to numbers.

Ones, Twos, Threes, etc. Area One, Area Two, Area Three, etc. Much in some anime series and the Hunger Games. Everyone would have collective punishment until they once again become worthy of having a nation, a culture, and a flag.

I'm just stating the obvious that nothing actually worked as a system in history because if it fell or became corrupted, then it didn't work. The only thing that has worked are principals or specific values. If conditions change, technology advances, men aren't being killed in wars, or the population becomes to large, any functional system can survive change, it's values don't weaken, and it's traditionalism doesn't disappear. So, I am just recognizing the fact that all attempts to recreate the past as it was in the past is futile. The only method that can work is recreate the past with a future design and a new form, and during that recreation, create it so it's flexible enough to survive change.

Three main factors necessary for a new Renaissance:
1. Remove excess men.
2. Eliminate democracy and republics.
3. End all corporations, profiteering, and the power of financial capital.

[Outcast9428]

Human Civilization as it exists now everywhere in the world must be completely annihilated in it's current form and recreated with a radical new system to achieve a true and near-perfect civilization. Burn the rotten systems to ashes and create a new system from the ground up.

This is why I said that it’s hard to distinguish you from an extreme leftist. The primary philosophy behind traditionalism is the idea that we return to a system that’s been proven to work. We replicate what worked in the past in order to solve modern problems.

With this whole post, you’re basically denying that the past actually worked and are saying the only solution is to do something completely new. That’s progressivism in a nutshell… Nothing in the past worked so we need a new system. You’ve gone so far to the right that you’re more like an extreme left winger then a traditionalist. Although there is some room for innovation among reactionary/traditional ideology… This is not even adhering to the basic values of traditionalism.

It's neo-traditionalism because I am not a leftist at all. I want to completely end leftists and progressives. I care about the traditional values, not preserving the nations.

I favor destroying all notions of democracy, republic government, capitalism, marxism, and destroy all the institutions subverted by the Jewish Elite. All nations that have become controlled by Jewish leadership or acquiesced to Jewish control will lose their rights to even have a national flag or to have their cultures. Maybe once they have been corrected, they can once again have a nationality and a flag, but I would have all subverted nationalities reduced to numbers.

Ones, Twos, Threes, etc. Area One, Area Two, Area Three, etc. Much in some anime series and the Hunger Games. Everyone would have collective punishment until they once again become worthy of having a nation, a culture, and a flag.

I'm just stating the obvious that nothing actually worked as a system in history because if it fell or became corrupted, then it didn't work. The only thing that has worked are principals or specific values. If conditions change, technology advances, men aren't being killed in wars, or the population becomes to large, any functional system can survive change, it's values don't weaken, and it's traditionalism doesn't disappear. So, I am just recognizing the fact that all attempts to recreate the past as it was in the past is futile. The only method that can work is recreate the past with a future design and a new form, and during that recreation, create it so it's flexible enough to survive change.

Three main factors necessary for a new Renaissance:
1. Remove excess men.
2. Eliminate democracy and republics.
3. End all corporations, profiteering, and the power of financial capital.

It’s not really neo-traditionalism though because this system completely violates everything our ancestors stood for. It doesn’t bear any resemblance to their values whatsoever. I’m not saying you have to bring back every tiny detail of the past but this doesn’t bear any resemblance to the past at all.

[Lucas88]

Polygyny was a thing because men use to die in wars. Men are capable of loving multiple females equally. A girl cannot love multiple men equally. A girl can also only birth offspring for one guy. A guy can father offspring with multiple females. Also, not every man is suited for monogamy and it's in the nature of some guys to want polygynous relationships. The best way to meet the needs of polygynous men is to have excess females. It's immoral for men to have more than one female if other men can't have one, which is why I mostly agree with @Outcast9248, but if there's excess females, then I think it's completely acceptable for some men to have polygynous relationships if they require it. Also, some girls are naturally bisexual, so it would benefit them to have a polygynous relationship where they can be married to a guy and have MFF threesomes or just "girl fun" in the context of a polygynous relationship.

I don't know whether it really is immoral for some men to hoard multiple females while lesser men remain incels. Nature prioritizes survival and pragmatism and seems to be largely if not wholly bereft of morality. As for incels, some of them are afflicted by conditions such as autism, physical disabilities and deformities and therefore deserve sympathy since their problems are beyond their own control, but many other incels are simply undesirable men who lack desirable masculine virtues and who have little or nothing to offer a woman and are therefore not desired by the majority of women. Often these guys are unmasculine low-test whussies with no physique and no ability to protect a female (yes, protection is the most fundamental good that a man can offer). Moreover, some incels are opposed to self-improvement or the cultivation of desirable masculine virtues and therefore do themselves no favors. But the objective truth is that, in a modern world with a global population of over 8 billion, high technology and much less warfare than in previous eras, their reproductive, labor or military contribution to society isn't even necessary. They are simply superfluous men.

But your proposal would be a powerful solution to the incel problem. With the sex ratio being artificially made to give birth to more females, the value of men would be greatly raised in light of our scarcity in relation to females. There would be more than enough women to go around for everyone. Monogamous guys would be able to pair off with a single female of their choice while the more polygamous @WilliamSmiths of the world would be able to take two or more women for themselves. Not everybody wants the same thing. We all have our own individual natures. Some people are naturally more monogamous while others are more polygamous. Moreover, women would have to up their game. They would have to make themselves beautiful, display feminine behavior and develop feminine virtues in order to attract a man. Feminism would be completely killed. Selective pressures would serve to increase the quality of the majority of women.

Female bisexuality should also be regarded as socially acceptable. Females with bisexual tendencies should have the freedom to lez off with other girls without any social stigma in order to avoid loneliness, especially those who are in polygynous relationships and while their alpha stallion husband is busy with one of his other wives. At the same time bisexual females who are more lesbianistically inclined could form relationships with other bisexual females but also become baby mamas and friends-with-benefits partners for some guys. Society as a whole should stop being so prudish about female bisexuality and Sapphic love and see them are the beautiful things that they are.

Meanwhile, men should be encouraged to cultivate our desirable masculine virtues which may include physique, primal masculinity, martial virtue (ability to protect females), social savvy and conversation, erudition and creativity among other things. With automation and advanced AI expected to serve to reduce the amount of labor necessary for the functioning of civilization and shorten the workweek at around the midway point of the century, most people should enjoy more leisure time and use it for self-improvement. A culture of virtue and self-edification should be promoted. People should be encouraged to constantly forge themselves into greater versions of themselves. Guys should put down the PlayStation controller, turn off the anime and throw the pot away in order to focus on physical training, combat sports, reading, intellection and artistic pursuits. We need to become worthy of calling ourselves men.

Pure monogamy is completely unnatural for many people. Love in most cases is nothing more than an illusion. Society must understand that many couples fall out of love and therefore end up trapped in loveless marriages or the relationship was always merely transactional to begin with. It would make no sense to try to force such couples to stay together for illusory romantic ideals or baseless moral prejudices as some tradcons wish to do. I am therefore skeptical of TMM (traditional monogamous marriage) and believe that there are better options going forward, especially in the kind of female-abundant type of society that you propose to create.

Wiping out all the worthless and useless excess in the world is necessary. Quality people are much better than quantity. If I wanted to restore the White Race to it's former glory, first I must turn my swords against the White Race themselves. The Jewish Elite only dominant through their oppression of excess men and their brainwashed White collaborators who are nothing more than NPC serfs. A cull of Whites is necessary for the restoration of the White Race, and removing 20%-40% of males from the birth ratio enhances the quality of life for all males alive and that will be born.

I agree that the Jewish elite must be wiped out and the Jew-dominated financial system and the ZOGs must be completely dismantled before we can experience any kind of authentic civilizational progress. Most of the problems of the modern world have their origin in the corrupt Jew financial system which is a complete fiction and con job from the ground up as well as the Jewish conspiracy and its programs of negative social engineering. Everything will get getter once those are removed and noble and enlightened Gentiles form our own governments, economies and financial systems designed for the benefit of our own people.

If noble and enlightened Gentile governments establish their own economies and financial systems in a world without Jewish plutocratic domination, they will be able to create material conditions in which everybody is able to do okay and men are able to support multiple wives.

As for the need to remove the dregs of society, the current elite is already in the process of doing that with the rolling out of the clot shot, albeit for different reasons. The current elite wishes to kill off as much as 90% of the global population since they know that their system is wholly unsustainable in the long run and then enslave the survivors in their nefarious Messianic plantation of Gentile enslavement following the "Great Reset". We must thwart their attempt if we wish to have a future as a species. The current elite will cause absolute chaos but their risky attempt to implement the final phase of the NWO will leave us with a window of opportunity to rise up and overthrow the enemy. If that occurs, then there will be a power vacuum and another system will have to take its place.

I think the injection option where 20%-40% of men will be injected with it to render all male sperm unviable, and all their viable sperm will be for female offspring.

The only real testing that must be done to ensure that it doesn't make the the daughters incapable of producing sons and that their sons can have sons with a girl. Once it's been tested, it will be possible to implement an injection so 20%-40% of men can only have daughters.

I've never heard of that kind of technology before or even the theoretical idea thereof. Can you perhaps post some links for me to read?

[Tsar]

It’s not really neo-traditionalism though because this system completely violates everything our ancestors stood for. It doesn’t bear any resemblance to their values whatsoever. I’m not saying you have to bring back every tiny detail of the past but this doesn’t bear any resemblance to the past at all.

It actually does bear resemblance to the past.

1. Democracy and Republics are toxic and shouldn't exist. Monarchism is the natural system and that's authoritarian and at times totalitarian.
2. The economy or nation should provide for all it's members. Only limited inequality is tolerable until it becomes destabilizing.
3. Corporations have no right to exist. Their existence undermined and undermines civilization.
4. Excess men undermines the social contract and traditional relationships by contributing to unnecessary scarcity of females. Males need a female to have inspiration, motivation, hope for the future, and a reason to contribute to the system. When they have a female, they have loyalty to the system because they are integrated.
5. Financial power of commoners should have no influence over politics or government.

I favor a Monarchist version of National Socialism with the elements of Strasserism which has some overlap with communism. I favor authoritarianism with borderline totalitarianism. I favor a society which celebrates men but has an abundance of females and encourages traditional values. I favor a society that has the belief in Creationism and agnostic Deism. People choose whatever deity or deities they believe.

@Outcast9428 World society at the minimum needs almost everything from the last 300 years erased and expunged. Other time periods have more merit but much of what has been created in the last 300 years has contributed to a decline in human civilization. Although, I guess that's because the Jews subverted everything, or destroyed National Socialism which was decent but Hitler only went halfway like Strasser claimed. Any resemblance to America's past wouldn't be ideal to begin with but every nation has ultimately failed. Jews have undermined much of history. That's why any ideal system must remove all traces of harmful Jewish influence.

Civilization worked best when it didn't have Jewish influence. It also worked best when fiat money and corporations didn't exist. It also worked best when all the individual workers were empowered. Civilization also always works best throughout history when there's an abundance of females and resources.