The imminent collapse of world civilization is becoming apparent to more people as the economy grinds down and international frictions accelerate. Even so, most people still believe the overall decline is due to some kind of plot, political bungling or economic miscalculation.

Whatever they believe, they are still blind to the real root cause of every socio-economic and political upheaval; a surplus of people, and worse, a surplus of inferior people. Further, they seem to think it Hitlerian to advocate the destruction of the millions of parasites who have doomed civilization. Actually, Hitler's program was plain and simple nationalism, whereby the German was to be supreme over every other race and ethnic group. Much is made of his proposed program to sterilize defectives. But this only involved obvious mental basket cases. Any German able to tell the difference between one end of a gun and the other was to become part of the "Master Race". The uniformed Germanic ape would have been placed over even intelligent Americans. Hitler's bias in favor of Germans over the superior Americans and British of his day stems from his being an Urbanite and a politician. If any bias is valid I'd favor the most dim-witted but productive clod kicker in the Ozarks over an Urbanite and/or politician.

I bring up Hitler only because I'm so often accused of imitating his thinking in my advocacy of sterilization and euthanasia in regards to ridding our species of inferiors. But as a reincarnationist, it would be silly of me to be either an active nationalist or racist. I could be reborn white, black, yellow, Gentile, Jew, Protestant, Catholic, etc. (There may be no truth in the doctrine of reincarnation, but so what?). My only concern in ridding our species of inferior vehicles is a kind of insurance. This is that I, or anyone else, will be well born, well reared, well educated and well occupied. Plus, without morons dropping surplus young onto the welfare rolls, adequate individuals could keep most of their earnings for the benefit of themselves and their loved ones. Regardless of the socio-economic system, there is no justification for public funds being squandered on demanding parasites.

Our present horde of public charges has become an accepted obligation on the part of the average American taxpayer. Every politician falls all over himself apologizing for any fancied slight to "the truly needy". But who truly needs the truly needy? And why should the truly needed be enslaved on their behalf? Why should the lives of the improvident aged prolonged by strangers? Why should the fertility of welfare parasites be subsidized by society's workers? There is no logical reason for any of these miscarriages of compassion.

Modern Urbanites have become so psychologically and economically locked into the system of perpetuating the useless and unfit that it will take a nuclear war to rid us of them. It does no good to try to reason with Urbanites since they're unable to grasp the basic issues. In case it's not clear in your mind, let me give you a few simple illustrations which I hope will put the problem in its overall perspective:

Say this country was a body and the people were its cells. Say further that over a third of the cells were either old and worn out or physically or mentally defective, or predatory, attacking normal cells. Now, say your doctor said you had cancer and he was going to cut it out. But you say, "No. My cancer cells have as much right to live as my normal cells". You'd be judged insane.

But our country has millions of old people, being kept alive artificially, in misery, long after Nature/god decreed they should die, and at great public expense. Millions of physical and mental defectives are not only allowed to live, but encouraged to reproduce their blighted kind; again at public expense. Millions of predators, with known records, are allowed to run free to rob, rape, maim and kill; still at staggering public expense. If jailed, they often live better than their victims, to the detriment of the taxpayer.

So this country is afflicted with collective insanity and terminal cancer. The terminal cancer is self-explanatory. But the collective insanity is manifested in the average Urbanite's ignorance in believing in the timelessness of today. The Urbanite's mind is beset with thousands of impressions each day. Rapid change is a natural part of his life. His days are so full of differences, he can't remember well what life was like five years ago, much less twenty. And history is a meaningless panorama of unrelated or foreign impressions. So it is natural that the laws of cause and effect, so noticed by those dwelling in more placid rural areas is lost on him. Add to that the fact that the average Urbanite is possessed of a hopelessly low I.Q. and the more intelligent is desperately neurotic and you have an urban populace of nitwits.

It's little wonder that the relatively normal Urbanite can't see the forest for the trees. Surrounded by the imbecilic and the twisted, he thinks he's anti-social, out of place and just a frustrated malcontent if he doesn't see his Disneyland for dummies as the best of all possible worlds. If you corner him and give him the facts he'll admit he's uneasy for himself and his loved ones. But his job is there and besides, Congress won't let Social Security go bankrupt. The Russians aren't suicidal enough to start a nuclear war.

Without realizing it, he's been caught up in the hysteria of the dimwitted and the psychotic Urbanites around him. The wishful thinking of his inferiors has weakened his instincts for self-preservation. Living in the timelessness of the parasite, he has no sense of history or of the laws of cause and effect.

Of course, Rurals have little better sense of history, as such. Since they are into a more basic economy they seldom need the education or the broad frame of reference requiring long term historical evaluations. But they are much more aware of the laws of cause and effect and so can better understand what happens when losers reproduce.

So the above and the following will be lost on Urbanites but will be understood by most Rurals. But after all, the Urbanites are deservedly doomed and the Rurals are the seeds of the next civilization. So it's to the Rurals these warnings are redirected in hopes that humans will finally learn.

Warnings of overpopulation have been given since Plato's time and probably before. The warnings were all valid, as Greece, Rome and every following civilization was eventually swamped by vast numbers of useless and degenerate citizens. Misery and cultural loss has always been the price of "humans" breeding like animals. Thomas Malthus put his finger on the problem in 1797 but was opposed by the Urbanites of his day. The following is from Chamber's Encyclopedia, 1891:

MALTHUS, THOMAS ROBERT, the expounder of the theory of population, was born 14 February 1766 at the Rookery near Dorking in Surrey, where his father owned a small estate. He was ninth wrangler at Cambridge in 1797, was elected Fellow of his college (Jesus), took orders, and was appointed to a parish in his native county. In 1798 he brought out his Essay on the Principle of Population, which attracted great attention and met with no little criticism. During the following years Malthus extended his knowledge of the subject both by travel and by reading, and in 1803 published a greatly enlarged edition of his essay. In 1805 he married happily, and soon after was appointed professor of Political Economy and Modern History in the East India Company's college at Haileybury, a post which he occupied till his death at Bath on 29th December, 1834.

Personally, Malthus was a kindly and accomplished man, who followed what he believed to be the truth, and who endured without a complaint the abuse and misunderstanding to which his writings exposed him. The aim of the Essay was to supply a reasoned corrective to the theories regarding the perfectibility of society, which had been diffused by Rousseau and his school, and which had been advocated in England by Godwin. Malthus maintained that such optimistic hopes are rendered baseless by the natural tendency of population to increase faster than the means of subsistence. He pointed out that both in the animal and vegetable kingdoms life was so prolific that if allowed free room to multiply it would fill millions of worlds in the course of a few thousand years. The only limit to its increase is the want of room and food.

With regard to man, the question is complicated by the fact that the instinct of propagation is controlled by reason; but even in his case the ultimate check to population is the want of food, only it seldom operates directly, but takes a variety of forms in accordance with the complexity of human society. The more immediate checks are either preventive or positive. The former appear as moral restraint or vice. The positive checks are exceedingly various, including all unwholesome occupations, severe labor and exposure to the seasons, extreme poverty, bad nursing of children, large towns, excesses of all kinds, the whole train of common diseases and epidemics, wars, plague, and famine.

Malthus goes on to illustrate the action of his principle by a review of the history of the different nations and races, showing what are the actual checks that have limited population--celibacy, wars, infanticide, plagues, vicious practices--and proving that the population difficulty has affected the development of society from the beginning.

It cannot be said that Malthus was original in his exposition of the theory of population. It is a theme of both Plato and Aristotle. Shortly before the time of Malthus the problem had been handled by Benjamin Franklin, Hume, and many other writers. Malthus crystallized the views of those writers, and presented them in systematic form with elaborate proofs derived from history. In certain details and in the form of exposition the Essay may be criticized; but the broad principles of it can be doubted only by those who do not understand the question.

The enormous increase of the means of subsistence attained by colonization and modern industrial development has only for a time postponed the population difficulty for the world at large, while its pressure is still felt in the more thickly peopled centers both of Europe and of the East. At the present time the most interesting feature of Malthus is his relation to Darwin. Darwin said on reading Malthus On Population that natural selection was the inevitable result of the rapid increase of all organic beings for such rapid increase necessarily leads to the struggle for existence. To prevent misunderstanding it should be added that Malthus gives no sanction to the theories and practices currently known as Malthusianism. In this reference Malthus approved only of the principle of moral self-restraint; do not marry till you have a fair prospect of supporting a family.

SSRsi Sidebar: We think Kurt Saxon is just a little bit nuts. And something of a bigot. This being said, he is a prolific writer with many good points being made. The beauty of this Nation is that each of us has the RIGHT to be as crazy or bigoted as our conscious allows, as long as we don't infringe on anyone else's right to do the same. With this in mind, and repeated frequently to ourselves, we find greater benefit in hosting Mr. Saxon's articles than [God forbid] banning or editing them. We hope you agree and, failing that, understand.

 

Please Read The Website Disclaimer!
Copyright 1986-2012, The Survival & Self-Reliance Studies Institute (SSRsi), All Rights Reserved
Site conceptualized, designed, created & maintained by MEG Raven
Snail Mail: SSRsi, PO Box 2572 Dillon, CO. 80435-2572