Why don't whites breed?

Why don't whites breed?

Attached: extinction.jpg (800x615, 198K)

A decades long demoralization and brainwashing media campaign

Attached: Screenshot_20190707-023646~01.png (1024x1004, 1.13M)

The chart shows clearly that asians and south americans don't breed either.

The real answer is less of our kids die in the West, so we don't need as many.
On top of that the cost of having a kid is much higher in western countries, whereas its a free pair of hands in poor countries.

>inb4 Jews
You can't blame every problem you have on the Jews.

Jews

White kids live past 5

That’s cause the Chinese have a one child policy cause they’re overpopulated and Japan is just like America. The population of Japan is demoralized and fagified and it’s possible the Jews are doing it purposely to them too since they were allied with Nazi Germany.

CAUSE THEY ARE FAGS

Kids are loud, smelly, ungrateful, annoying and pretty dirty. You have to invest very much money and even more time and in them.
And this world is fucked up. If you have no kids, you won’t worry about the future that hard. You are more a bystander. In the worst case, You’re gonna die. But if you have children, the worst case will be way worse!

Attached: IMG_4709.gif (320x240, 814K)

>white people
Make sure to get 4 years of college, a car, a perfect mate, a perfect job with a high salary and a big house before thinking about starting a family.

>PoC vagrants
Have as many kids as you like, the white people will pay for it.

the real answer is not political, it's evolutionary

low birth rate is evidence of a safe, wealthy society. you can afford to have just one kid because you can feel it's obvious he's going to grow up, be healthy, and have children of his own. Our genes want to be immortal and live forever.

If you live in a disease-ridden shithole, perhaps there's an 80% chance your kid will die from a disease that you can't afford to get the cure for. So, how do your genes make sure they live forever? they urge you to have more and more children. the hunger for children isn't sated.

evolutionary psychology is vastly underrated, first from the conservatives because it implies evolution and is therefore 'anti-god', and now from liberals because it implies a biological basis for human behavior, which they think must be rooted in prejudice, patriarchal, etc.

tl;dr it's evolutionary. if poor societies didn't have huge birth rates, they would completely die off and be lost to the ravages of time. white westerners are wealthy, so we can choose to maximize the prospects of one child in comfort, and not have to divide our food and attention among several children.

also, more advanced societies have better access to birth control and family planning. again, there's an evolutionary foundation, in that there is more demand for it to begin with, because now people can afford to have less kids. still, we need to ship condoms by the fucking truckload to african villages to get the birth rate down so that it's all more sustainable.

Because not all races are fucking brainlets.

Because white are unattractive

The real question is: "Why do shit skins spawn like vermin?".

Sources ?

one child polic is only in the big cities in china

i don't really feel like digging up a source, just know this is a very general finding in evolutionary psychology.

the roman empire was at its height almost 2 thousand years ago. the average number of children a woman had was EIGHT. for the same reason.

a lot of infant mortality, also plagues happened every so often. the 'black plague' is not the only plague in history, not by a long shot. so, with all of the death, women had to pump out babies like crazy just to keep the birthrate sustainable.

the 'replacement' rate is 2, meaning 2 parents have 2 kids that have now replaced their parents once their parents die off. that means the population is perfectly still. for poor societies today, or somewhat-advanced societies 2 thousand years ago, the replacement rate is really around 8 because so many people die before having children.

this is also why poorer societies and societies in the past had such tight controls on women. they needed to force women into marriages at young ages, keep them monogamous, and regulate their sex lives in order to make sure they are churning out babies into stable families. one of the reasons for the decline in religion and the rise of reproductive rights and technologies is that women don't have to be tightly controlled anymore - we don't need a high birth rate, and now we have contraceptives so we don't have to worry about many births outside of wedlock. this is not to say anything about the morality of doing it, only the practicality in evolutionary terms.

all of this is evolutionary, and not designed or researched with any morals in mind. evolution is just about self-replicating DNA hosted in organisms - if organisms are successful, you see more of this DNA. organisms placed in dangerous, poor, filthy environments are only successful if they churn out babies like crazy.

in short, social conservatism pushes the birth rate up - hence, it is adaptive for certain societies and communities

This...

Stop sending food to Africa. You think food will relive their misery? Not at all, they just have enough energy to fuck more and hatch more niglets.

We don't have nearly as many rapes as Africa. I like to think we're at least somewhat civilized. Besides, kids are expensive and most of those niglets die in their first few years anyway.

They typically plan for the future of their children, while darker skinned people tend to just pump out 5+ then go from there.

>You can't just blame every problem you have on the Jews.

Attached: IMG_20190707_090608.png (577x539, 115K)