Thread 515073242

How does Africa have such a high fertility rate when it’s collapsing everywhere else in the world?

>>515073242 (OP)
> Peru

>>515073338
So?

>>515073242 (OP)
subsaharans have nothing to do all day besides fuck
>>515073338
fertility rates are down in south america too retard

>>515073632
You are short

>>515073709
I'm not. I might as well call you short too, you too would answer no. So, neither of us really know.

Because the whole world feeds them.

>>515073242 (OP)
BBC

>>515073242 (OP)
white people keep feeding them
it's a huge tragedy

>>515073242 (OP)
all they do is ooga booga, like they've done for centuries

/pol/ will avoid the truth that white people choose to not breed because they want to be le comfy adultchildren. High birth rates are normal, it's the death rate that has changed.

>>515073242 (OP)
It's their only entertainment

>>515073242 (OP)
The birthrate collapse is a multifaceted phenomenon, but what we know for sure is that one of the causes is economics. For many years, people were asking the same question about India. Now they are below replacement and falling. Almost every year, Nigeria is dropping by 1.5%. It has been dropping since 2002, with the sole exception of 2024. It could take 5-10 years, or it could take 2-3 years. Africa will be the last place to fall below replacement, but no one seriously believes it will stay above replacement for much longer.

consumers do not breed - they consume

>>515073242 (OP)
>>515073835
>>515074349
>>515074658
>>515074679

The real answer is 18 magical age theory/child labor laws

>>515074700

The delayed Western European Marriage age pattern which was caused by feudal marriage taxes was already bad enough, but child labor laws & aggressive enforcement of child labor laws on top of the delayed marriage age pattern is a literal death cult ideology.

>>515073242 (OP)
Poverty

>>515074883
Children do crave the mines, but that isn't all of it. The economics are a bit complicated. Throughout all of human history, most of your population increase has come from the countryside. Why? Because if you have a farm, having kids is a labor advantage. Where are the places that have seen the biggest drop in birthrate? East Asia. Why? Because their entire countryside is empty. There are no families with small farms in East Asia. Literally almost none. On top of the emptying of the countryside, there is the monetization of public spaces. Where do you meet women nowadays? Not a fucking bar. An app. Where do young people spend time around each other? They don't. Why? Because every public place has a charge attached to it now, and hanging out in public spaces has been demonized by boomers. Try to just sit in a park with a few friends. Some HOA Karen will hassle you, or stare at you like you pissed in her Cheerios. These are just two, but there are several of these just on the economic side of the problem.

Africans just love to fuck, there's really nothing else to it.

No old people holding every resource and wealth, unlike the rest of the world,
also this >>515075899

>>515073242 (OP)
Legal rape, just like india

>>515073242 (OP)
It’s falling there too. The overall TFR for Africa in 1980 was higher than the highest TFR now. So they are just behind the curve.
People will say economics, but I disagree, I suspect it has way more to do with culture (religion) and women. Once you get women to believe that having children is low status, and that they should be instead earning money, traveling, partying, being career focused, etc. then fertility drops.
If you have ever been over to the Nigerian Chan, you probably saw many of the same complaints about women as men post here. It’s a world wide issue and it’s going to continue until some drastic change alters what women see as their purpose.

It's really simple. Africans are parasites being fed by retarded white people. Take away their food and they'll return to eating their children en masse and reduce their numbers to the low thousands.

Because they fuck like rabbits and the kids starve and die so they fuck more and this repeats forever.

>>515073242 (OP)
they're majority under 40 since people dont live as long under those conditions

>>515073242 (OP)
>what is r vs K reproductive strategy?
Anon...

>>515073242 (OP)
They have to be sterilized

>>515076677
That is definitely part of the issue. I would argue that it is easier to solve than you frame it. Get rid of Instagram, and in 3 years, the birthrate will start going up. Women have comparative expectations. If their phone is constantly showing them curated bullshit from a fake influencer painting their lives as perfect, they will expect something similar. If they don't have that poisonous influence tricking them into viewing their lives as the bottom of the totem pole, they will stop putting insane expectations on their BF and husbands. I would say 30% of this entire issue is being caused by Instagram.

>>515073242 (OP)
dem programs

I guess it's time to review the basic redpills about r/K selection theory.

To summarize.
Organisms can either be r-selected, or K-selected, based on their environment. This involves 2 different types of reproductive strategies.

r-selected
-- "quantity" over "quality"
-- focus on mass production, reproduce as fast as possible
-- the offspring typically get very little parental care or investment
-- typically associated with prey animals
Example] A frog that lays 1000 eggs in a pond, then hops away to lay 1000 eggs in the next pond. The offspring are left to fend for themselves. By sheer random chance, some survive

K-selected
-- "quality" over "quantity"
-- focus on producing the best offspring possible
-- the offspring typically get tremendous care and investment
-- typically associated with predators
Example] A bird that lays a few eggs, and spends tons of effort keeping them warm, feeding the hatchlings and teaching them to fly.

It's hypothesized that Africans are more r-selected, and Europeans are more K-selected. Looking at the facts:
>africans have a shorter gestation time, and a quicker maturation rate
>africans produce twins at 8x the rate of Europeans
>africans have a higher sex drive and become sexually active younger
>african families are way more disorganized and chaotic, raising children communally
>africans have a lower IQ
It does seem like Africans are maximized for rapid population turnover.
Europeans have pairbonded families, they delay sex until later, and usually enforce marriage. This enables the production of very high quality, high-investment offspring.

Why would this evolution take place? Likely because in a harsh winter environment, you can't afford to shit out kids willy nilly left and right. You need higher quality offspring to survive the harsh conditions.
While in Africa, food is not an issue, there is no winter. The biggest cause of death is predators and disease. You want a high population turnover to replace the ones that died.

>>515077636
== continued ==

Because of our modern world, we have basically solved scarcity. There is no more real struggle for food or resources. This is exploding the r-selected populations. In such a scenario, blacks will ALWAYS have a higher reproduction rate, by magnitudes, and there's no way around that. The only thing controlling their population in nature is the very high rate of death of their people due to the African environment. Without that, they explode off the chart. It would be like if you removed all the predators for a frog's eggs, and all 1000 of them grew into full adults. The population would explode overnight.

It's worse than that though. Even within the white population, the lower IQ people are reproducing way faster. It's the same basic trend.
The way to fight against this trend would be a Eugenics policy.

Darwin was very well aware of this, and commented on it extensively. He actually celebrated deaths among the poor, as it was curbing their reproduction rate, which seems to be the only check and balance against them.
He also outlined a basic eugenics policy designed to counteract the negative effects of modern technology on birthrates. Just as we curb air pollution, water pollution, this is just basic race hygiene.

>>515073242 (OP)
You think birth control has anything to do with it? I know it causes infertility, but nobody is allowed to talk about it (because Muh big pharma prophets).

>>515073242 (OP)
it doesn't you stupid fucking brown
their numbers are fudged to receive more gibs and I'm going to starve all of you to death

>>515077636
>>515077911
Actually this whole thing is governed by a differential equation known as the logistic growth curve

https://math.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Calculus/Calculus_(OpenStax)/08%3A_Introduction_to_Differential_Equations/8.04%3A_The_Logistic_Equation
> ^ this page loads slowly, but it's good

Pic related. See how the curve slopes up, and then levels off? The place where it levels off is the environments "carrying capacity".
Imagine the population faces a lot of predators and disease. So it never reaches the carrying capacity. It's perpetually stuck in the rapid growth phase. In this scenario, it makes total sense to produce *as many as possible*, since you're not resource-limited.
This section of the curve is governed by the "r" constant in the logistic growth equation. Thus, this population is said to be r-selected.

The place where the curve levels off is governed by the K-constant in the logistic growth equation. If your population reaches this place, then you're actually limited by the environment itself. You can't afford to reproduce rapidly...or at least....it's less desireable. In this case, the population is capped, so your advantage is not having "more" but having "better". So these people will be selected for the highest quality possible.

I would add a caveat here too. Because in Europe, food is easy to come by, but only through hard work and intelligence. If you put very hard work into the land, you can get a lot of food out of it. This raised the carrying capacity a lot.

>>515079448
>This raised the carrying capacity a lot
So I'm trying to say that, the carrying capacity is not actually a constant or a static variable in this case. You can actually raise the carrying capacity when you make advancements.
This is probably why Europeans developed such strong bodies. This advancement enabled them to get more calories/acre out of the land. And of course improvements in trade and technology too.

Asia went through a different type of selection. It's likely that because they faced seasonal floods, particularly around the Yellow River where their main civilization was, they went through boom and bust cycles. The population would level off, be steady, then suddenly be cut and rapidly rebound.

Notice in Asia, people have way less aversion to "disgusting foods". They'll eat practically anything. This is probably because the survivors of this boom/bust cycle would get any calories possible into their bodies, from any source possible, without the luxury of choosing. Might also have something to do with why so many diseases come up out of asia, since they aren't so picky about what they eat. Bat soup anyone?

This is probably also why they have small bodies, to conserve calories. The smaller body people survived better in the times of scarcity.
Plus rice doesn't need hard backbreaking labor to farm, you don't need large powerful bodies like in Europe.

Poorer and less educated nations tend to have higher birth rates.
Also, if you commit suicide you'll be reincarnated into one of these African children in the next life. (or Indian)

>>515076985
Yeah?