I'd agree that the two solutions aren't compatible, but an anti-natal position is a civilizaitonal death sentence, and maybe a kind of personal one too. "Women are shit, so let civilization die, and I'll be alone forever because fuck women" isn't even a mature, let alone reasonable, answer to any issue. Anti-natalism just can't be adopted as a solution across any society, and even individually it cultivates a personal sense of paranoia, depression, and fatalism. Anti-natalism is black-pilling.
Worse, anti-natalism is everywhere on the Left who genuinely want, and profit from, depopulation efforts. Again, an anti-natal solution is victory for the Left and death for civilization... all civilization.
There can't be a compromise on that. I'm not saying you must have kids if it ends up not being possible; but you can't give up and die.
I think anti-natalism is an underlying root of both the environmental movement, and may be a genuine desire of some of it's economic policies. The effects of inflation can be mitigated if you kill people, steal their assets, and introduce those assets into the economy. That's what the Nazis did to fight inflation, and was a major part of the Holocaust. Remember that there are tons of Malthusians in elite circles.
If you mean white people being a shrinking minority:
I don't, but we're closer to the same page on that. I think that it's the result of the sexual revolution, without the level of degeneracy that plagued the black community. If it wasn't for welfare for single mothers, I think blacks would have already demographically fallen off a cliff.
I'm not saying that "going back to trad times" is a solution, but what I'm saying is that the problems are within men's powers to fix, but that fixing society has to come from maximizing men's agency, dominance, and independence. Women will come along with those men, and the government & feminism would be undermined below it's foundation.
I don't think Men's rights is wrong for it's approach. I think it's just not the end goal. It's a limited utility tactic. It can only work to a finite degree if we get listened to. But frankly, we're not going to be listened to, so a more MGTOW approach, and a trad dominance would do more damage to the system. I actually do think almost everyone is capable of that. And those who aren't basically need to be carried by those that can (and those that can, need to be the majority).
I'd agree that the two solutions aren't compatible, but an anti-natal position is a civilizaitonal death sentence, and maybe a kind of personal one too. "Women are shit, so let civilization die, and I'll be alone forever because fuck women" isn't even a mature, let alone reasonable, answer to any issue. Anti-natalism just can't be adopted as a solution across any society, and even individually it cultivates a personal sense of paranoia, depression, and fatalism. Anti-natalism is black-pilling.
Worse, anti-natalism is everywhere on the Left who genuinely want, and profit from, depopulation efforts. Again, an anti-natal solution is victory for the Left and death for civilization... all civilization.
There can't be a compromise on that. I'm not saying you must have kids if it ends up not being possible; but you can't give up and die.
I think anti-natalism is an underlying root of both the environmental movement, and may be a genuine desire of some of it's economic policies. The effects of inflation can be mitigated if you kill people, steal their assets, and introduce those assets into the economy. That's what the Nazis did to fight inflation, and was a major part of the Holocaust. Remember that there are tons of Malthusians in elite circles.
I don't, but we're closer to the same page on that. I think that it's the result of the sexual revolution, without the level of degeneracy that plagued the black community. If it wasn't for welfare for single mothers, I think blacks would have already demographically fallen off a cliff.
I'm not saying that "going back to trad times" is a solution, but what I'm saying is that the problems are within men's powers to fix, but that fixing society has to come from maximizing men's agency, dominance, and independence. Women will come along with those men, and the government & feminism would be undermined below it's foundation.
I don't think Men's rights is wrong for it's approach. I think it's just not the end goal. It's a limited utility tactic. It can only work to a finite degree if we get listened to. But frankly, we're not going to be listened to, so a more MGTOW approach, and a trad dominance would do more damage to the system. I actually do think almost everyone is capable of that. And those who aren't basically need to be carried by those that can (and those that can, need to be the majority).