David Craig, on March 9th, 2016The population of the Arab world is exploding, both figuratively in that it is increasing frighteningly fast, but also literally as some Arab men are blowing themselves up as they seek a fast track to Paradise and their 72 virgins who, according to some aging bearded cretin (sorry, I meant ‘respected *sl*mic cleric’) “have skin like alabaster and are not tainted by menstrual blood or faeces”.
In Saudi Arabia, for example, there were 4.2 million people in 1961. By now there are probably over 30 million:
That poses a problem for Arab leaders – how to find useful work for their teeming and ever increasing millions.
Of course, some countries – Syria, Libya and Iraq – have launched rudimentary population control programmes:
But this has hardly slowed the rapidly increasing number of Allahu-Akhbar-screaming lunatics intent on conquering our planet and destroying civilisation.
For a start, as I explained in a blog a few weeks ago, the average IQ of Arabs (82), though above that of sub-equatorial Africans (69), is far below that of Europeans and Chinese (100). Most of these Arabs are thicker than the thickest person you’ve ever met. Maybe that’s why they adore their hideous, violent, intolerant, bloody, supremacist death cult which they mistakenly call a ‘religion’?
The women are not the issue. Most of them are locked away till they’re 15 or 16 and then married off to be the third or fourth baby factory for lecherous 50- or 60-year-old men.
It’s the young men that are the problem.
I recently read a book about Saudi Arabia’s efforts to encourage foreign investment creating jobs in that country and why this was a failure as foreign firms found ‘It was not only that decades of state largesse had made the younger generation disinclined to work, but also that the education system, which overemphasized religious instruction, had failed to give them the skills they needed to work productively’.
So, I tried to imagine what a job interview for a US company looking for an apprentice maintenance engineer for say a new air-conditioning factory or car factory might look like:
Interviewer: Abdul, I see you came top of your class. That’s impressive.
Abdul: God looked kindly upon me and gave me that result, Inshallah! He who is the only God, and is the God I serve, will use me an his instrument to bring death and disaster to the filthy Jews and the bastard sons and daughters of America, the Great Satan. For they shall all go to Hell as the one and only true God has demanded, Allahu Akhbar!!!!!
Interviewer: Um, yes, of course. And what were your favourite subjects at school, Abdul?
Abdul: Reading the K*r*n, understanding the K*r*n and memorising the K*r*n. For the K*r*n is the word of God as given to his prophet, M*h*mmed. And the K*r*n teaches that the recompense of those who wage war against God and his Messenger and do mischief in the land is that they shall be killed.
Interviewer: Abdul, what is it about mechanical and electrical engineering that specifically interests you?
Abdul: I want to learn how to make bigger and better bombs so I can attack the crusaders and drive them from the land of Allah, the only one and true God, and his prophet M*h*mmed the slaughterer and beheader and crucifier of infidels. Allahu Akhbar!!!!!
Interviewer: Yes, very interesting. And what about your longer-term ambitions, Abdul? What is your main goal over the next five years?
Abdul: To die for my God as a martyr killing as many unbelievers as possible. Then I will go to Paradise and live in eternal pleasure with 72 virgins as my reward while all unbelievers will burn in Hell for eternity.
Interviewer: Thank you, Abdul. It’s been a very useful meeting. As I’m sure you know we have a lot of other highly-qualified candidates to see today. But we’ll let you know our answer by the end of next week.
Abdul: If you American Zionist pigs dare open a factory here and enslave the sons of *sl*m trampling on their honour and desecrating their holy country of the two mosques, I will willingly give my life to send you to Hell. It has been ordained that *sl*m will conquer the world and the unbelievers shall pay Jizya to their M*sl*m rulers or shall be put to the sword and their heads shall be cut from their bodies, Inshallah!
Interviewer: I fully understand. And I promise you’ll here from us very soon.
The interviewer stands up and tries to shake hands with Abdul. Abdul refuses the handshake, spits on the floor in front of the interviewer and then leaves the room frothing at the mouth while screaming “Death to America!!! Death to the Great Satan!!!”
Interviewer: Good grief! I’ve done 20 interviews today and every one of the candidates has threatened to kill me. I’m not sure we should be opening a factory here.
(You can leave comments by clicking on the headline of each day’s blog)
Category: 
I love it. !!
However, speaking as a Scottish Baron Industrialist, I encounter similar problems on a regular basis interviewing people with Glasgow accents who think that us refined Edinburgh folk are just a bunch of pansies.
The so called EU deal with Turkey over the migrants. People assume that the EU elite did not get a grip on the migrant crisis. Czech President Milos Zeman said he was deeply convinced we are facing an organised invasion.
The EU are removing the visa requirement for 80 million Turks. It will not be difficult for the migrants who travel through Turkey to obtain Turkish citizen documentation.Then we will not see scenes on TV of people marching across Europe. As they will just come by ferry and planes. What the EU are doing is not containing the problem , even if they wanted to, but conceal it.
With reference to populations and invasion of the West:
The governments of Europe are confronting an epochal choice in the Mediterranean. Do they allow Europe to remain on course toward inundation by the African population explosion, inevitably turning Florence into Ferguson and Barcelona into Baltimore?
The conventional wisdom is that it’s unthinkable to stop the African tsunami. Veteran public radio correspondent Sylvia Poggioli assured gullible NPR listeners on Monday:
This is a human tide that cannot be stopped,” she says. … Europeans have to start providing legal channels that will allow them to seek asylum here. This is a humanitarian crisis, says Mascena, that cannot be solved by use of force — or by leaving these desperate human beings bottled up in Africa and the Middle East.
Or will Europeans adopt the sensible policies of Australia that have succeeded at turning back Camp of the Saints – style invasions by boat?
The Sub-Saharan African population bomb is the most obvious long-term problem facing global peace and prosperity. We’ve been lectured for decades about climate change, but the staggering fertility rates among black Africans have been largely hushed up over the last quarter of a century. We’re supposed to assume the problem will solve itself without any white people ever being so crass as to mention that it’s even a problem.
While birth rates have dropped in much of the world, they remain staggeringly high in much of Africa south of the Sahara. The simplest measure to work with is the total fertility rate, a projection of babies per woman per lifetime. While many countries have dropped below the replacement rate (for example, Iran is at 1.85), there are 35 countries in black Africa with total fertility rates over 4.0, compared to only four elsewhere on earth.
The highest TFR is seen in desert Niger at 6.89 babies per woman. You could argue that Niger in the southern Sahara is an unimportant wasteland, with only 8 million people back. (Oh, wait, that was back in 1990. Now it’s up to 18 million.)
“It’s important for naïve white people to understand why black Africans aren’t terribly inclined to limit their own numbers, at least not without strict immigration restriction and constant hardheaded prodding by Westerners to undertake family planning.”
Even more worrisome are giant Nigeria (177 million people) at a TFR of 5.25, Ethiopia (97 million) at 5.23, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (77 million) at 4.80.
And that’s assuming that chaotic Congo is actually counting its vital records properly. UN demographers recently discovered that they had been understating the current total fertility rate in Africa by 0.25 due to shoddy record keeping by African governments. Thus, two years ago the United Nations Population Division released a shocking update to their population projections, revising the forecast for the continent of Africa upward to 4.2 billion in 2100 from 1.1 billion today.
That is about a half dozen times greater than the population of Europe.
Africa is almost certainly not going to add over three billion residents over the next 85 years. Something else will happen instead, ideally a decline in African fertility to sustainable levels rather than mass migrations or a rise in the death rate.
Africans will attempt to decamp en masse to Europe and to other first world countries, such as America.
If Africans aren’t allowed to get away with that, however, they might actually deal with their own fertility excesses, just as almost everybody else outside Africa has more or less done.
The problem is that this reform needs to happen soon. Due to the phenomenon of “population momentum” even after the Total Fertility Rate falls to the replacement rate, the population keeps growing for about another 40 years.
It’s not impossible for black cultures to learn to show some self-restraint. The total fertility rate in Barbados, for instance, is only 1.68 and in poorer Jamaica it’s 2.05.
Even dystopian Haiti is down to 2.79 from 3.80 at the time of the earthquake in 2010, although with little thanks to the enormous number of NGO charities that white people run on that densely populated and deforested Caribbean country to keep the Haitians fed. After the 2010 earthquake, I looked for foreign charities boasting online of providing contraception to Haitians, but could find almost none. Apparently, that would be racist, even though a lower population growth rate clearly ought to be the highest priority for that impoverished land.
It’s important for naïve white people to understand why black Africans aren’t terribly inclined to limit their own numbers, at least not without strict immigration restriction and constant hardheaded prodding by Westerners to undertake family planning.
Europeans used to be less naïve about African proclivities.
Evelyn Waugh’s 1932 satire of the Emperor Haile Selassie’s attempt to modernize Ethiopia, Black Mischief, includes a bravura passage about the progressive government’s effort to launch a Pageant of Birth Control with a poster showing a starving family of thirteen next to a prosperous family of three, with the question “Which home do you choose?” inscribed above “a detailed drawing of some up-to-date contraceptive apparatus.” The peasantry, however, interpret the emperor’s advertisement in an unexpected fashion:
See: on right hand: there is rich man: smoke pipe like big chief: but his wife she no good: sit eating meat: and rich man no good: he only one son.
See: on left hand: poor man: not much to eat: but his wife she very good, work hard in field: man he good too: eleven children: one very mad, very holy. And in the middle: Emperor’s juju. Make you like that good man with eleven children.
And so the peasants flocked into the capital, “eagerly awaiting initiation to the fine new magic of virility and fecundity.”
But Waugh was Punching Down: so today we’re more high-minded and thus more ignorant about Africa.
Why have black Africans traditionally been obsessed with procreation? In the most comprehensive and insightful explanation of Africa I’ve ever seen, the 1997 book Africa: A Biography of the Continent, author John Reader notes:
Children were precious and the drive to reproduce became a central feature of African culture and social order. … From the time that Europeans first set foot in Africa, travellers have commented upon what they saw as an excessive interest in sex among Africans.
Reader is an English photojournalist who was sent by Life Magazine in 1969 to photograph a Leakey family expedition to dig up early proto-human fossils. This triggered in Reader a passion for understanding Africa at the deepest levels.
Although Reader’s book never uses the term, a central aspect of his model of what makes humanity different in Africa from most of the rest of the world is its traditional lack of a Malthusian limit.
In most of the world, the struggle to feed a growing population from a limited amount of land strongly disciplined the culture in some fashion, perhaps in the direction of monastic celibacy, intensive cultivation of the soil, or late marriage. The average Englishwoman from 1200 to 1800, for example, married around age 25.
High cultures attempted to sublimate sexual drives into art, but in Africa, dance (with its constant pelvic thrusting) is intended to encourage impregnation as soon as possible, rather than at a carefully chosen time.
Why was there no Malthusian trap in Africa until quite recently?
Outside of a few healthy highland regions such as Ethiopia and Rwanda (home to notorious genocides), for most of the thousands of years that agriculture has been practiced, the vast sub-Saharan region has been relatively underpopulated:
The human population has never approached the size that the continent seems capable of supporting. … An FAO survey published in 1991 reported that only 22 per cent of land in Africa suitable for agriculture was actually in production (the comparable figure for south-east Asia is 92 per cent).
Reader notes that because humanity originated in Africa, both diseases and mega-fauna competitors such as elephants and lions have been co-evolving along with us over the millions of years. Thus, humanity never got the drop on the African ecosystem the way it did on other continents, especially the New World.
When the first Siberian hunters broke through into North America, they rapidly filled up the New World because there were few indigenous diseases and the trusting local elephants, such as the wooly mammoth, didn’t anticipate that these unimpressive looking two-legged newcomers carried sharp spears.
But in Africa, tropical diseases such as sleeping sickness and falciparum malaria were a major cause of infant mortality and an incessant drain on the adult population.
Moreover, elephants were wily rivals to humans. Without a dense concentration of humans to drive off marauding herds of elephants, they could eat your entire crop in a day:
A “sort of chessboard effect” developed, with people occupying one set of squares and elephants the other. … [O]ral histories recount how farmers succeeded in raising crops to maturity only when their fields were close together and the local community was large enough to supply the people needed to repel raiding elephants.
But if human density got too high, infectious disease took its toll, especially on the young. (That’s why black Africa was so lacking in urbanization.) In Africa, life (and death) was more random than elsewhere, so lack of foresight was less reliably punished and planning less often rewarded.
The rational response to the African environment was simply to procreate more offspring whenever possible, even though you may well lose numerous children to disease and do a poor job of educating the others. In Africa, traditionally, the biggest risk was having too few people in your village:
Lone farmers stood little chance, and if conflict or disease reduced a community’s manpower, elephants rapidly completed its collapse.
This realist perspective shouldn’t make us too gloomy about Africa’s ability to change, though.
These African traditions of quantity over quality in raising children are now obsolete in a world where elephants are no longer rivals. Africans now have AK-47s, so it’s more likely that four billion Africans will kill off all the wild game than that the elephants will get the upper hand again.
Indeed, many people in Africa today would like to change their self-destructive old ways. But if white people keep reassuring them that they’re awesome just the way they are and that any problems they have are the fault of bad white people, how can we expect Africans to develop a less catastrophic culture?
The real problem Africa was not colonized much at all. The entire colonial period for most of Africa wasn’t much longer than the rule of a Mobutu, Mugabe or any other President for Life’ and the colonial powers were less rapacious and more interested in the welfare of the people than indigenous tyrants.
Even in the Portugese colonies of Angola and Mozambique which spent 400 years as Imperial outposts, European influence was almost non existent outside of the capitals. Only the British made any real attempt at settlement and the white population of Rhodesia was never more than 300,000 out of 6 million and in Kenya and Zambia was less than 1% of the total. Even so, that brief era of 60 or so years was the most prosperous those nations have ever known.
There aren’t going to be several billion Africans (population of subSaharan Africa was about 15 million in classical times) because they already are unable to feed themselves without outside help. Starvation is the ultimate Malthusian control…Fresh water is also disappearing rapidly… China is in the same boat, and they have bigger oars….Most of the farm land in Africa is of poor quality, quickly exhausted by intensive agriculture, and meanwhile the exporting nations are beginning to experience the same problems.
oh, those poor Africans. lets send plenty of do-gooders to feed their breeding stock and ensure that the population pressure continues. then we need to invite more of them to invade our country and teach us the glories of the new religion (the one invented by a murdering desert pedophile).