/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12484184
Probably both to some degree. Native French women almost certainly outbreed other native European women. Germany, for instance, also had a large migrant population, yet Germany has a much lower fertility rate than France. France also has a much larger population than demographers from the early 20th century predicted.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/breeders-revenge/

>Then the worm turned. German fertility plummeted after World War I, and even the Nazis with their “Kinder, Küche, Kirche” rhetoric were unable to force a recovery to peak Weimar levels. Meanwhile, the French – long derided for “race decay” by the Anglo-Saxons and the Germans – started to make more babies. Ironically, this began during the Vichy period, at the trough of France’s fortunes, and spread to the rest of the country after 1945; the French have been much more fertile than the Germans ever since. Whereas one 1920s League of Nations demographic projection saw the French population falling from 40 million to 29 million by 1970, it instead soared and now stands at 65 million.
>But why this turnaround?
>I would argue that this historical French dissolution paved the way for present day French virility, and conversely, past German “culture-forced” virility paved the way to present day dissolution. Or to put it in numbers, whereas Germany underwent its fertility 3 generations ago, the France had their about 5 generations ago. Their society has been selecting against those who reproduced less for a while longer, and it is starting to tell.

>>11971929
Pic related

>>11904119
They won't repopulate Europe unless there's a White genocide. Whites are due for a fertility rebound.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/breeders-revenge/

>>10637957
Nothing you are saying does anything to refute anything in the aforementioned articles. The fact that technology is causing fertility rates to drop NOW doesn't mean that it will remain that way for the rest of time. You are only looking at fertility rates in the short term.

The effects of natural selection on fertility can already be seen in France vs. Germany, for instance. The French had a demographic transition about 5 generations ago, whereas the Germans had theirs about 3 generations ago. Native French, due to having more time for evolution to take effect, not have have about 1.5x the fertility rate of native Germans.

Even if you are right, and it is somehow magically impossible for the human brain to become resistant to the fertility damaging effects of technology, that still doesn't refute anything I'm saying. The Old Order Amish, for instance, have one of the highest fertility rates of any religious group in the US. The Amish are projected to have a population of around 7 million by 2100, despite currently only having a population of around 300,000. Furthermore, the defection rate of the Amish is decreasing, due to selection pressure increasing the "Amish Quotient". Even if the low fertility you describe is somehow permanent, all that that means is that the future will be dominated by technology-averse peoples like the Amish.

http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-inevitable-rise-of-amish-machines/
http://www.unz.com/isteve/cochran-harpending-paper-on-amish/
https://www.takimag.com/article/race_of_the_amish_steve_sailer/#ixzz33dlSsPv3