True Left

In the past, the following query was often raised: "Wouldn't it make more sense for rightists to support abortion (which would include more "non-white" abortions than "white" abortions as "non-whites" become the majority)?" I now finally understand why it would not. It is because the optimal strategy (which I believe rightists subconsiously sense even if they are not consciously aware of it) for "white" supremacy is as many "white" births as possible, even if it also means as many "non-white" births as possible at the same time.

Why is this? Answer: because it is likely that "white" machinists/N "white" births > "non-white" machinists/N "non-white" births. Thus when both sides increase their fertility by the same factor, "whites" get more additional machinists out of the increase than "non-whites" do.

Imagine if gene pool P produces 1 machinist/1000000 births, while gene pool Q produces 0 machinists/1000000 births. If fertility is sufficiently low for both P and Q, the likely outcome is for neither to produce even a single machinist in a given generation. On the other hand, if fertility is sufficiently high for both P and Q, the likely outome is for P to produce at least one machinist while Q continues to produce no machinists in a given generation. In the latter scenario, it won't matter even if Q outnumbers P in total population, because that one machinist could invent a machine that becomes a force multiplier for P in war against Q to a degree that more than offsets any advantage Q had over P from raw population number.

Reality may not be as clear-cut as 1 vs 0, but the principle still holds.