Europe's top leaders are all childless

[Concrete Whale]

If childless politicians are the problem, then how do you explain pathetic cucks like Obama and Trudeau Jr. who both have extremely annoying wives and more than one child and are fighting to destroy their respective countries?

Obama is a gay and Michelle is a tranny. Their children are adopted.

 

[The Beevers Revenge]

I should head over to Europe and help them by having unprotected sex with as many women as possible. I won't even charge them for my services.

That is really good of you, with you being a homosexual and all.

 

[Thunderflash500]

greater than the song dynasty? different groups have been on top at different times.



lmao. what were you saying about being scientifically literate?

as is often the case, you dont need a conspiracy to explain this shit. non industrialized countries have lots of kids. why? because youre most likely a small farmer, and kids are helpful in that type of lifestyle. in a modern industrial economy, kids are unfortunately, a drain on your time and an average cost of 100k by the time theyre 18. so......its really not rocket science why people have fewer of them.



everything comes back to islam for you eh?

You miss the point of everything.

If I say Europe built the modern world you'll come at me with some study on the contributions the Inuit people and act like you got me. Who the fuck is more scientifically literate than the English? Than the Germans? Nobody.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

It's a fucking horrible idea.

What's the alternative? Put an end to homosexual/gender-bender propaganda, emphasize traditional relationships and gender roles between men and women, emphasize the value of traditional marriage and its greater purpose of raising healthy children, emphasize the reproductive rather than recreational role of sex, decrease the number of abortions, de-emphasize the use of contraceptives, focus resources on families rather than trying to turn every single individual into an optimal, isolated productive unit, etc.

lol. so you think someone could convince you to be gay under the right circumstances?

emphasize traditional relationships all you want...emphasize any culture or religion you want, and it wont change this:

if you live in an industrialized country, kids are a burden. thats just how the F it is. they cost money and time. so if you have one, they were either an accident, or you REALLY want one, and decide that you have the resources to enjoy them. countries that have a lot of kids arent industrialized. so kids feed themselves on your farm.

It's not rocket-science people. If freaking Vladimir Putin was able to turn around a dying-off, post-Soviet Russian population, to reproducing at a great rate, what's our excuse?

contrary to the right's odd love affair with putin, russia isnt actually doing that well. both their economy and military are a bit exaggerated. many people in russia, now live in a very pre industrial way.

 

[Seano]

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10306/childless-europe

Europe’s Childless Leaders Sleepwalking Us to Disaster

"There have never been so many childless politicians leading Europe as today. They are modern, open minded and multicultural and they know that “everything finishes with them”. In the short term, being childless is a relief since it means no spending for families, no sacrifices and that no one complains about the future consequences. As in a research report financed by the European Union: “No kids, no problem!“.

Being a mother or a father, however, means that you have a very real stake in the future of the country you lead. Europe’s most important leaders leave no children behind.

Europe’s most important leaders are all childless: German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and the French presidential hopeful Emmanuel Macron."

“Europe is committing suicide. Or at least its leaders have decided to commit suicide”, wrote Douglas Murray in The Times. “Europe today has little desire to reproduce itself, fight for itself or even take its own side in an argument”.

Thats actually pretty telling if true. It is boggling why Europe's politicians seem to give no thought to its future.This helps explain it a little.

 

[sangreporsangre]

I'm sorry but adults who don't have kids or have any intention to have them kind of creep me out. Maybe that's just my biases, I find it hard to relate because I've been a father the entire time I've been an adult. As it pertains to high-level politicians, they're all scum and I don't trust them either way, kids or no kids.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

You miss the point of everything.

If I say Europe built the modern world you'll come at me with some study on the contributions the Inuit people and act like you got me. Who the fuck is more scientifically literate than the English? Than the Germans? Nobody.

europeans built a lot of the modern world, and deserve credit. lets not pretend that they did this in a vacuum, though. would europeans have set sail conquering the world, without silk road inventions from other places? would they have sailed the seas without constantinople being blocked to them once the turks took it? they took inventions from the middle east and china, to then invent things themselves.

racists and nationalists from every culture and country seem to refuse to admit, or are simply too ignorant, to realize that the things your culture has done would not be possible without them standing on the shoulders of others. since the mid 16th century, europe and the US have been the place to be. but it wasnt always that way, and likely will not always remain this way.

 

[Gigas]

Who needs kids when you can flood your post nation states with all the rapfegees muslim's and africans???

 

[JonnyRingo84]

I'm sorry but adults who don't have kids or have any intention to have them kind of creep me out. Maybe that's just my biases, I find it hard to relate because I've been a father the entire time I've been an adult. As it pertains to high-level politicians, they're all scum and I don't trust them either way, kids or no kids.

it shouldnt creep you out.

kids cost a LOT of money and time. for some people the trade off is not worth it.

 

[sangreporsangre]

it shouldnt creep you out.

kids cost a LOT of money and time. for some people the trade off is not worth it.

Well the trade off is, do I want a family or do I want more stuff? People who prefer material crap to the idea of having a family really do creep me out. But I'm not trying to derail this thread with my personal hang-ups. Then again it wasn't much of a thread to begin with I guess.

 

[Unsurprised Diaz]

Just like there exists a shadow government ruling behind the scenes with these leaders, there also exists shadow children for each of these leaders

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Well the trade off is, do I want a family or do I want more stuff? People who prefer material crap to the idea of having a family really do creep me out. But I'm not trying to derail this thread with my personal hang-ups. Then again it wasn't much of a thread to begin with I guess.

its not just a more stuff thing. actually, thats probably never what it is.

what if you have 30k in student loans and dont feel like you can start a family, until its really too late to do so?

what if you have a career that you love, and having kids could jeopardize that?

what if you want to be able to read a book, or go to the movies without an act of congress?

some people may just like simple lives, and in an industrial economy, kids will not keep your life simple.

some people couldnt see their lives without kids, and thats fine too. different strokes for different folks.

 

[KnightTemplar]

He is only considered a monster because the allies won. If Hitler had won WW2, he would be considered a hero, like George Washington. The winners of war, write the history books.

Of course the children admired him, he was the leader of their country, they were raised to view him as their father. You honestly expected them to look at him with disgust?

 

[wlu.29]

Not all, but your politicians that are unmarried and/or childless will probably tend to be the most Marxist.

How about Republican pedos?

 

[IDL]

What's the alternative? Put an end to homosexual/gender-bender propaganda, emphasize traditional relationships and gender roles between men and women, emphasize the value of traditional marriage and its greater purpose of raising healthy children, emphasize the reproductive rather than recreational role of sex, decrease the number of abortions, de-emphasize the use of contraceptives, focus resources on families rather than trying to turn every single individual into an optimal, isolated productive unit, etc.

It's not rocket-science people.

Yeah it really isn't some brain-busting complex problems that can't be figured out. It's very basic.

Values (psychology) and culture are the key.

This can be seen quite easily between religious and non-religious people. There are of course many other factors, but if there was a will to raise birth rates by promoting tradition, pride, and family, it would not be that complicated.

I think the biggest issue is that those in power want the complete opposite, in order to facilitate their demographics engineering and globalization (dissolution of nation and building of international government)

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Just read that wiki page. WTF??? She wasn't even a youngish teacher when he met her in highschool. 39? Macron can hang his head in shame.

LOLz, well who knows. She is French woman. I hear they take great care of their bodies.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

In Russia there is some rumors about his sexual orientation. Like, when he kissed some young boy in the stomach. I didn't read it, but some people mentions that in his autobiography Putin said that he married because superior KGB officer (if I'm not mistaken) recommended him it. Some people also think it's strange that his ex-wife called him Vladimir Vladimorovich in interview. I think even in most hardcore concervative families people doesn't call their relatives like that.

Does vladimorovich mean he is gay?

 

[sangreporsangre]

its not just a more stuff thing. actually, thats probably never what it is.

what if you have 30k in student loans and dont feel like you can start a family, until its really too late to do so?

what if you have a career that you love, and having kids could jeopardize that?

what if you want to be able to read a book, or go to the movies without an act of congress?

some people may just like simple lives, and in an industrial economy, kids will not keep your life simple.

some people couldnt see their lives without kids, and thats fine too. different strokes for different folks.

Yea that sounds like an empty, soulless life. Existence is probably a better word. No I don't want to start a family because my career is more important. Yikes, I can't even imagine how full of regret and misery that person would be if they make it to old age. Someone who values the ability to go see the latest Hollywood blockbuster over having a family is pretty messed up to me. Not that you can't go watch movies without your kids anyway - I haven't found life with children to be so unbearably difficult and all-encompassing like you're portraying here. Life with children can be very simple. Just look at mine. I mean anyone who reads my posts knows that I'm simple, but my life is as well. This is all just my opinion, as you say it's different strokes for different folks. I'm just disturbed by how many people here are the kind of folks who would rather dedicate their lives to consumerism and materialism than have a family. Most people I know that are my age (I turn 35 this year) don't have kids and waste all their money on bullshit they don't need. In a few more years most of them will realize how empty their lives are, then have an autistic kid in their early 40s and try keeping up with him while they're already old and grey and miserable. I have 2 kids and I'm trying hard for more because they're the greatest blessing I've ever received in my life.

 

[snakedafunky]

This can be seen quite easily between religious and non-religious people. There are of course many other factors, but if there was a will to raise birth rates by promoting tradition, pride, and family, it would not be that complicated.

But that is not really true, is it? If you look at South Korea and Japan they have the strongest tradition, pride and family values from all industrialised countries.
And they also have the lowest birth rate or among them. What they do have in common with western countries is their economic standards.
That is really the most important factor by far when it come to birthrate. The economic situation.

The richest countries in the world Monaco and Singapore also happen to have the lowest birthrate.

 

[Feniamin]

Does vladimorovich mean he is gay?

Nope.