The Morality of Depopulation

Noise Removal

The human mind is 99% noise, 1% useful information. Buddhists meditate to remove mundane, anecdotal noise from their mind. Meditation is great for women. Women have an amazing response to yoga, sunlight, and music.

Women are restricted and imprisoned in a coffin of jello. A black SUV rolls up. A net is thrown over a fat woman, and she is dragged inside a black ambulance, a dump truck. She is driven to the coast, dropped off on the beach. Banned from public school, driver's license revoked, EBT cards frozen, welfare checks voided. No fly list.

If a fat Amish person lives on a hippie commune, growing their own food, not driving a car, they are safe. But a parasite, dependent on the state, crawls on hands and knees once they get a little hungry or uncomfortable. They are loaded into vans, driven to the coast, dropped off on the beach.

They have clean drinking water. They roam around the beach, sobbing and crying, complaining and moaning. After fasting for 20 days, they begin to hallucinate and experience religious miracles. They see the face of God and form spontaneous cults.

No one would be fat without the chemicals. It's not their fault. Everyone would be skinny without the chemicals. Then food would be more expensive. Obesity is the number one cause of infertility, that and the chemicals.

Drowning in a sea of fat.

The end is nigh, the apocalypse is coming, and everyone is just waiting for it to happen. Everyone knows it's true, everyone can feel it and everyone can sense it. Everyone puts different labels on it: the second coming of Christ, the singularity, World War III, COVID-for-real, nuclear war, 1984, dystopia, 1,000 years of darkness, the collapse of civilization, year zero. Did anyone see the Black Plague coming, or the 30 Years War?

Something terrible is coming. But for whom? Try to help the weak, self-hating, soft, incapable, neurotic, anxious, self-pitying. Give them little motivational speeches and monologues. Try to encourage them. Women do this to each other. "You got this. You are so strong. I believe in you. Don't give up! Love yourself!" This attitude is evolutionarily necessary. Every child needs encouragement from its mother. The encouragement that a mother gives to her child is priceless. Some never grow past this stage. They mother others, and mother themselves: an emotional feeding tube hooked up to an emotional vegetable. Cut the encouragement, and it would just die.

Death is a good part of life. A typical superficial leftist loves the earth, they love overpopulation, they think every human has infinite value, and they believe that by shitting out sunshine and writing asexual fanfic to every little cutsey-wootsy baby-waby they can save the planet. Let them die. They started raging, throwing a fit, calling names like poopy-head or maybe it was shit-head, who cares.

Everyone dies. The question is when, how, and whether or not they reproduce. Don't value life in some abstract sense where death doesn't exist. To value life, desire death.

Mark Hamill

Imagine the most popular kid in college. Maybe there were no "popular kids" — no cliques, everyone just got along. Humor me. Who was the most athletic? The most intelligent? Who had the biggest share of both intelligence and athleticism? That person was most likely popular, or if they weren't, it was due to some kind of shyness. But such a person can be recognized easily from an early age. Around age 18 it is possible to entirely discover a person's latent potential. Whatever athleticism they have at 18, whatever intelligence they have, that is already established. Whatever they accomplish from that point on is a function of that athleticism. There are very rare cases of fat people at 18 getting skinny later on, and perhaps this is an exception. Give the fat kids a second chance (although this wouldn't happen if there were no chemicals). The captain of the team, the star player, wasn't dumb. He did well with the ladies. Girls liked him. Maybe he had a "chad" jawline or looked a bit like Mark Hamill or Hans Christian Anderson. Not a bad jawline, but not some kind of lego-minecraft-bobble-headed freak. He looked normal.

If he knocked up all the girls at your college, he would make the world a better place. Think of the worst kid at your college. He hated himself, was clumsy with a stutter, his friends hated him and picked on him, hated his parents, became a hardcore leftist, converted to a strange religion, started taking estrogen. He was misshapen and hated for his appearance and personality. People judged him by his looks, but also by his poor character. He had an inner nervousness, an awkwardness, felt misunderstood and left out. A total freak. Yiddishkeit identifies with this outcast, the subtext of so many superhero stories. Otto Weininger wrote about this. Imagine if this worst type, this unfortunate type, knocked up all the girls at your college. The world would be a worse place.

Wiggle around this, call it eugenics, be offended, think it's gross, make logistical objections, invoke the will of God, the Bible, or social stability. Make a compelling argument. Despite all the moral objections, the truth is this: That one popular athletic intelligent good-looking guy would make the world a better place. Single moms would survive, and their kids would do great. If all the girls were knocked up by the dumbest, ugliest freak.. hopefully the girls have access to abortion clinics. If not, there is always the medieval and aboriginal practice of infanticide.

Not all mothers love their children. Mothers who are defective and deformed have defective and deformed children. Every man with an unloving mother can blame his mother for his mental illness. But he carries her same genes. The son is no better than the mother.

Some girls at college weren't too great either. Some of them were dumb, some were clumsy, and some may have been terrible mothers no matter how great the father. Just as some men would be better off not reproducing, some women would be better off not reproducing. Only a few people should ever reproduce. Maybe you would be one of the lucky ones, maybe not. The unlucky ones universalize their objection. "That's not fair! Cruel! Inhuman!" Popular kids protest on behalf of their fellow students, as they have internalized this universal morality, noblesse oblige.

Imagine if only the sharpest, fastest, strongest kids at college reproduced. Star students and star athletes. Do you remember what they looked like? Maybe some of those "star athletes" had congenital schizophrenia that only showed up when they turned 25. Maybe one of those smart kids was cheating the whole time or working with a private tutor, and you overlooked some lazy genius. Everyone makes mistakes. No one is perfect. But imagine those pairings: three of the most confident, optimistic, golden and glorious. What kind of kids would they have?

Wouldn't you be at least curious to run the simulation, to find out? Condemn me, hate me, but wouldn't you look? ChatGPT has produced images of their kids, click here to find out, no one will know if you click... You would click. Everyone wants to see how each of their brilliant qualities would balance out and fuse together to produce new combinations. Of course, this does happen, and it should. But who clicks on the opposite couples? The girl with the stutter and the lazy eye, paired up with the self-hating boy with no friends? Do you really want to see their kids? If you say yes, this is sicker than the former situation. If you really want to see, your curiosity is not moral, but morbid. You want to see a car wreck.

None of this needs to happen. No one needs to reproduce. Historically, even those who had children would often see their children die before puberty. Child mortality is natural. Killing kids is natural when God or nature does it. The greatest tragedy in the world is the natural condition of life. The last hundred years is, by contrast, a gross aberration. I wonder if any of the medical scientists or pediatricians of that time could have had the slightest idea that they were breeding an idiocracy, mediocracy, ruling over a shuffling mass, mobility-scooter driven people of dough.

This is not justice. It would be one thing if these people were like deer. Every season, deer overpopulate. They copulate, reproduce, and there are too many hungry mouths to feed. They die of starvation or predation. Sex is cheap, survival is expensive. But the deer, whether they survive to reproduce, or whether they starve or are eaten, they only leave behind a corpse and a few droppings. Totally biodegradable. Imagine that! Imagine if a person died, and all they left behind was some poop and their cold corpse.

Humans are not like this. Humans build houses. Humans go to grocery stores. They buy meat, packaged in Styrofoam, put them inside plastic grocery bags, bring them out to huge, ugly concrete parking lots, drive them on drab, grey roads, and spray their lawns with pesticide. They are a net negative. Hippies like to pretend to moralize (nag) people into not doing any of this. Nag dumb slob harder and they will stop using pesticides. Fat chance.

If Styrofoam and plastic was banned, meat would be packaged in paper. Instead of paying $5 per pound for beef, you might pay $6 per pound. No one would go hungry, but they might eat less meat (the horror!). Without factory farming, paper-packaged meat costs $9 per pound. Paper packaging would make the meat less visible to customers, meaning that it might have some defects you wouldn't see before you bought it. That would suck, so you might have to buy twice the meat to just get one single good cut. $18 a pound. To eliminate the ugly parking lots, that's going to cost money. Maybe a fancy parking garage, or a meat delivery service. Either way, you can expect to pay a bit more for that meat, $20 a pound. Before, you could afford to eat meat every day. Now, maybe once or twice a week.

Roads are another area where if you want to make them beautiful, you have to spend money. Putting up medians with trees costs money. If you don't use pesticide on your lawn, you'll need to cut it more frequently, or pay for higher quality seed, or hire a gardener. It's all a tax on the working class. Good.

There are two forms of acceptable government: the kind which goes to war against the world, and the kind which wars against its own people. The first can be justified on the grounds that, if America is small and beautiful, without ugliness and waste, China and India will come to colonize us. The second is justified if our ugliness is as worthy of destruction as China or India's. The best form combines both.

Supposedly, neoliberalism caused the collapse of the Soviet Union, undermines China, starts wars in Ukraine, funds rebels in Africa and drug cartels in south America, causes global violence and terrorism and extremism and genocide. Some of this might be true, and if it is, why protest? The only society worth preserving is a beautiful one, and outside of some quaint and curious corners, the world is consumerism, greyness, trash, smog, pollution, trash.

No one has to deal with the trash. Put it in the dumpster, and away it goes. Have you ever visited a landfill? Have you ever stood atop a mountain of trash? Smell it. Watch the eagles circle overhead. All those who deny its horror, bury yourself inside it. Become one with it.

Everyone wants to hide the filth, ignore it, pretend it doesn't exist, hope it goes away. “Technology will fix it.” These lies are exhausting.

The problem is not "the globalists." The problem is not "neoliberalism." The problem is not the "callous elites." The problem is that the average person is like a deer, but amplified by technology, much worse. Consume until explosion, leaving shit everywhere. Human beings, on average, do not have the ability or moral sensitivity to stop polluting. It is an unstoppable force.

Let them eat soy. Let them eat bugs. The beauty of animals, plants, mountains and streams, and the rare creativity of the human mind will go on without them. Let go of the repetition of 8 billion mediocre lives with 8 million mediocre thoughts. Thoughts don't matter, and lives don't matter. This is the teaching of Buddha.

Whoever can stomach this has a soul, because they care about beauty more than popularity. They care about beauty more than human authority and human conventions. They are not afraid to be shamed or guilted into submission. They do not cower before the mass of humanity and its violence. The stampeding mob seeks to stamp out all beauty. Like a horde of locusts, they want to consume the natural world and replace it with suburban sprawl and parking lots.

Call this a "screed." Use labels like racist, Nazi, eugenicist, or globalist, leftist, satanist. Hate ugliness to love beauty. Those who do not love beauty latch onto petty things, like ideology, books, tracts, texts, authorities, stickers, labels, brands, trends, fashions. Their morality is "go with the flow," or "follow the book." The book told me that every human life is equal! The book told me to always listen to priests, experts, scientists, church fathers! They may collect Funko pops, or they may collect icons.

I take no issue with any label. What is the net effect? Adding to the pile of trash, or taking it out? Don’t just remove the trash: stop its production.

I am part of the problem. I go to the store, I purchase meat in Styrofoam containers, and I throw them in the trash. I was not the most popular guy. I didn't make the cut. I don't say these things because I am above them... But because I recognize that evil exists within me. This is not a matter of my superiority or inferiority, but recognizing that humanity itself is caught in some kind of sewage spiral, a race to the bottom. Everyone produces ugliness, some more than others.

I understand the homesteader, the commune dweller, the hippie. I understand the call to the soil, to grow your own food, own your own land, make your own clothes, to do everything from scratch. The problem is that for every one in a million that actually achieve this, there are hundreds of thousands adding to the pile. You aren't removing the trash. You are ignoring it and letting it grow.

Whether I am, in my own small way, capable of fighting back is a logistical question. What can I do? Write an article? Ask you to read it? I am doing it, and you are doing it, still left wondering what is to be done.

I am optimistic, because something is being done. If George Soros is guilty of a depopulation plot, then salute him as a hero. Let the food prices skyrocket. Let the land prices skyrocket. And praise God for infertility. Infertility is not a crisis, but a salvation! Let sperm counts drop! Let sex drives plummet! Let them all become obese and gay and transgender!

Each acre of land can sustain one cow. No chemicals, no fertilizers, no hormones. One acre, one cow. Cows convert grass into manure and meat and dairy. Add a few chickens and you have eggs. A small amount of wheat can provide flour. Put some fruit trees here and there.

Realistically, to feed a person in this way, with a healthy diet full of variety and nutrition, you need, on average, 10 acres. In some extremely fertile areas (Hawaii, the Great Lakes, or the California central valley), you might be able to cut this down to 1 acres. But the average here is a global average. At 10 acres per person, with 3.5 billion arable acres globally, this planet can sustain a population of 350 million.

However, every single square inch of arable land on this planet shouldn't be used by cows and farms, even if it were possible to do "sustainably." The occupation of all arable land by humans would mean the elimination of all predators, including wolves, tigers, lions, and bears. There are 867 ecoregions in the world. If each of them were given a single large wildlife preserve (the size of Yellowstone national park, 2 million acres), this would total 1.7 billion acres, leaving only 1.8 billion acres for human habitation. As a result, a planet with ample wildlife preserves can only sustain 150 million humans.

150 million was the population of western Europe in the 19th century. Such a population would still produce Beethovens, Bachs, Nietzsches, and Schopenhauers. Art, music, and industry could still exist.

The problem with achieving this is that any country which chooses to depopulate will be threatened by those who do not. However, this is a superficial problem. Initially, yes, large states such as the Soviet Union defeated smaller states, and still today, large states, no matter how inefficient or ugly, can swallow up smaller ones. However, in the course of centuries, imperial incompetence always leads to dissolution. The Mongol hordes do not last for long. Eventually what remains are central Asian nomads who return to a lifestyle of pastoralism.

Furthermore, the virtues of overpopulation are overrated. Most people are not capable of piloting or programming a drone. If the future is drone warfare, then as far as the military is concerned, the only relevant skills are programming and piloting. Can you program or pilot? Or perhaps if you think traditional warfare will make a comeback, can you run? Aim? Do you have courage under fire? Can you lead or work as a team? Can you sacrifice your own life in an aggressive assault? If you have none of these qualities, you are militarily useless. The obese, the dumb, the cowardly moralists are gum in the wheels of history. Their time is coming.

Soy is rat poison. Rats eat rat poison because they are dumb. Smart rats avoid the poison, but dumb rats eat it. Eventually, over centuries, rats will be bred to no longer eat poison. Similarly, people eat soy because they are either too stupid or too self-righteous to question the ingredient label. If the FDA says it's good, fine by me. These people will eventually become infertile. If this is a natural, inevitable process, why protest? Let it happen. This is the death of populism.

Populism, like soy, is seductive. It promises a return to 19th century nationalism. What an intoxicating, addicting thrill! Marching in columns, wearing the same uniforms, singing about the glory of the fatherland, laying your life down for your country, the patriotic parades, the calls to sacrifice, the glorious sculptures of fallen heroes, the streets named after the nation's founders. What's more, everything for the health of the nation. Everyone fit, athletic, beautiful, trained, ready for battle, sexually charged, fertile, active, passionate, united and breathing as one single organism. Such a state is still possible today, although in smaller form, not in terms of a "community" but in terms of a tribe. The distinction is subtle, and tribes are rarely achieved. A community is a shared space. A tribe is shared blood: the blood of ancestry, or the blood of violence. The attacks on the police and the simultaneous attacks on gangs are both anti-tribal ideologies. But tribes are the storehouse of ancient blood memories, which were activated en masse in the 19th and 20th century, and which can be activated still today in occulted forms.

It is necessary then for those thrill seekers to see the pure object of their desire in the tribal state rather than in the populist state. By peeling back the superficial glory of populism, tearing back the facade of normalcy and revealing the inner rot of the decaying human soul, a great purge and the morality of depopulation becomes necessary.