Overwhelming the Planet
The purpose of life has undoubtably been studiously pondered over and debated since man’s cerebral cortex first coerced him into thinking sentiently about himself and his place and status in the wider environmental matrix. Before even this momentous paradigm shift in human evolution, the biological antecedents of Homo sapiens engaged in procreation without consciously computing the longterm ramifications or significance of their actions. We can state, with the utmost confidence, that the impulse to breed is a hereditary instinct present in all fauna. Animals which do not or cannot reproduce themselves are, it can be surmised, no longer with us.
The Christian holy book acknowledges procreation as a divine task and introduces an early, synergic concept of an infinite man – capable of propagated both the human species and the message of his immortal deity – and man as the steward of the planet:
“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.“
It is probable that a religious cult or sect which proscribed sex and fecundity, or aspired to depress these biotic compulsions, would not have persisted for more than a single generation. It is therefore an incontestable truism that siring offspring is of pivotal importance to living organisms.
In relation to ‘higher’ lifeforms, and humans in particular, the prominence of reproduction is no less significant, and yet when choice (presumably a repercussion of an unusually robust and overactive frontal lobe) is introduced into the existential experience, we, especially those categorised as Homo sapiens sapiens, and more specifically, White/Aryan subdivisions, have been found sorely wanting of late.
Oswald Spengler adeptly elucidated the self-imposed suicide of the Occident in his impressive reflection on the diminution of our race. From The Decline of the West:
“When the ordinary thought of a highly cultivated people begins to regard ‘having children’ as a question of pro’s and con’s, the great turning-point has come. For Nature knows nothing of pro’s and con’s.”
Spengler’s “great turning point” is, of course, the falsely edifying cultural apex upon which we tottered for a brief period. Since Spengler’s book was penned, we, as a racial group, have stopped oscillating; our collective perspective is now held in thrall by a sheer and barren declivity and we are gradually succumbing to the massive gravity of absolute oblivion. We must draw a stark line under the notion that the perceived rights and happiness of the individual displaces the essential and pronounced amelioration of the Whole.
One such critical method of aggrandising our ethnic sept is the production of White children. Young are produced by a process of sexual intercourse, and reproductive sex can only occur between a fertile male and a fertile female. For that reason, we must have both. This is clearly stating the blindingly obvious, but it is often the case that racial nationalists humbly neglect this fundamental veracity. Any doctrine, belief, or conviction that does not embrace the basic processes of life — the chief among them being sex and procreation — is defective from the outset and is likely only temporarily loitering in our collective psyche before it is unmasked as a fraudulent and aberrant travesty.
It is excruciatingly apparent that our enemies (any group or individual which actively encourages our regional and global reduction or extinction) were cognisant of the truth that our unique race can effectively be hamstrung by impairing and repressing our natural, frequently hormonal, urges, long before our synapses finally fired-up and assisted us in joining together the rather large and abundant dots. Consequently, it should come as no revelation to us (we who fully understand our international plight) that our enemies promote entirely antithetical practises to those regarded as normal and salubrious by our forefathers.
Feminism – or the promulgation of the hatred of White men – is a form of psychological conditioning developed by our opponents; it effectively undermines the conventional interdependence that traditionally existed between White men and women. The schizophrenic verdict espoused by imbeciles that gender is ostensibly a composition of social and cultural differences, rather than a complex array of entrenched biological variations, is patently moronic, though it is widely ratified nevertheless. It is a cruel dialectical subterfuge that the entirely justifiable and warranted emancipation of women, and their elevation to a legal status equal to that of men, has been amalgamated with the singular seething loathing for our people — a thought which consumes the minds and motives of many Jews and the frenzied renegades within our own race.
Similarly, the promotion of the Negro male by a hostile media creates dissonance between the sexes; pressuring the Masculine to mimic the behaviour of, or become pitifully obsequious towards, the aforementioned personages — who represent the bisection of a competing human subspecies — and the Feminine to seek his sexual attention. The resultant interracial contact does not benefit our race. In point of fact, the aftermath of miscegenation is the genticide of our race, wherein precious genetic material fails to be disseminated and combined (due to the presence of competitors) or is perpetually contaminated with foreign DNA.
Other malignant ordnance unleashed against us includes the unnecessary abortion of healthy White foetuses; the endorsement and championship of homosexuality (and numerous — and ever growing — cognate varieties of sexual degeneracy and perversion); and the advocacy of fulfilling and stimulating careers, especially when directed at our women, who become preoccupied by their paid, heavily-taxed, hobbies in lieu of the creation of family units. The stifling of our proliferation is a biological weapon and it is being deployed without mercy.
But proliferation is not simply the mechanical procedure of producing offspring: it insinuates something more exhaustive, sweeping, and profound. Certainly we require more White people, but we should not propose a red line or an upper limit. Our proliferation must be boundless, unconstrained by trivial notions such as the earth’s finite natural resources. Our technological genius is inexhaustibly proficient and able to alleviate all matters material, while our burgeoning conviction will finally encourage us to sever the ethical umbilical cord that has so disastrously tethered us to our racial competitors.
It is true that in ages past smaller family sizes made sound ecologically sense. During the last glacial period (the Ice Age), for instance, proto-Europeans would habitually conceive only one or two offspring, but would provide for their progeny an unparalleled level of parental care and instruction. Due to the severe environmental conditions of the Northern hemisphere during the Pleistocene epoch, the production of fewer, though more adaptable, children was a distinct evolutionary advantage and permitted our ancestors to flourish in exceptionally grim and challenging terrains. This generative behaviour is at odds with the characteristically fecund human beings endemic to the warmer Southern continents.
In the current geological epoch (the Cenozoic) our ability to adapt to environmental conditions has shifted from the physical world to the convoluted grottos of the psyche. Perspicacious members of our idiosyncratic ethnic group have begun to understand that in order to withstand genocide [genticide] we must adapt our visceral survival mechanism and emerge as a creature ‘most responsive to change.’ The production of many White children is now essential given the shrinking global representation of our folk and other dolorous factors, such as miscegenation, mass non-White immigration, high non-White birth rates, unconscionable political administrations, and an enemy-occupied media.
As we are no longer forced to contend with the arduous hazards synonymous with a prolonged glacial period, a high White natality should be viewed as desirable, particularly when we reflect upon the monumental accomplishments of our race and its rare and venerable gift: the adventitious production of geniuses and men and women of great esteem, marvels which are noticeably less prevalent in our biological competitors. Our latent potential will never be realised unless we beget billions of healthy, hardy, and ingenious descendents. We cannot stop short of this — our thoughts cannot stray to merely replacing our dwindling population.
We must proliferate!
 King James Bible, Genesis 1:28.
 Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, 1918.
 In 1921, the father of the (racial) integrationist movement in America, Franz Boas, who appears to have been a racial Jew, admitted the destructive characteristic of what has been called a humanitarian crusade: “It would seem– that, man being what he is, the Negro problem will not disappear in America until the Negro blood has been so diluted that it will no longer be recognised.”
 Genticide is linguistically the correct form of this contrived word, which was cobbled together from mismatched component parts: the Greek genos, meaning “race, kin, tribe” and the suffix –cide, from the Latin “killing.” The misshapen locution was first coined by a Russian Jew, Raphael Lemkin, in 1943 and employed in his Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation — Analysis of Government — Proposals for Redress, in 1944. Lemkin, a lawyer by trade, become a Supreme Court advisor during the pitiless post-war witch hunt fiasco known as the Nuremberg Trials before he relocated to the United States of America.