They say that money can’t buy love. In this case, it can; except the “love” you are buying is coming from other progs when they see you’ve adopted a non-White child. Adopting from outside the group is fairly unique to Whites, who adopt not because they have the money but because having the money has produced the mindset, or “morality,” that wants to do so. By “purchasing” a “foreign” child, you are silencing your critics with a single blow and diversifying yourself. While abortion might free you from the slavery of motherhood, a foreign baby is worth its weight in gold. Adoption is about you, not the child.
Anyway, the obligation Whites feel to adopt, if they can remotely afford it, outweighs the White man’s (financial) burden. People in the West have long adopted Korean babies, for instance, not because Koreans are too poor to do it themselves but because Koreans need to be blood related to their own children. Even though all the unwanted kids are the same race, it’s still not close enough to be accepted in their culture. Even when non-Whites don’t help multiply themselves, Whites help them. Anything less than a Covid-19 pandemic to shut borders down and provide moral face-saving cover will not stop a prog from breeding someone else’s race.
There are many parallels between foreign adoption and the Western sensibility about immigration and refugees. Bringing a Third World baby into your house puts your social signal points through the roof. You will need no further proof that you have a “social conscience.” If you are willing to adopt a child into your family, you are certainly not opposed to immigration.
You can be sure there are many progs hard at work trying to use the “logic” that “if we adopt needy foreign children, why not also needy foreign adults, who are also innocent?” No pos-man prog wants you thinking that he is adopting only kids just because they are cute and he has none of his own. Not only does he want to show he is color blind, but age blind too! He might even go far beyond impersonal refugee advocacy and, like the cucked “man of the house” in the 2005 movie The King, actually adopt an adult into his family who harms his own children—so pathological is his ethno-masochistic altruism. This level of delusion can be seen with the recent migrant waves from the Middle East and Africa and the “caravans” from South America. If his daughter is raped or killed, like Molly Tibbetts murdered by an illegal migrant, he will defend the monster he has let into his home. His personal “morality,” or what he perceives as such, matters more. Tacos are more important to him than his daughter.
Remember, not only is Western morality personal, but so is its progressive “logic.” The more “intelligent” prog follows a “logic” that goes as follows: if I adopt a needy foreign child, shouldn’t I also adopt an adult that is in need of help? What if someone notices my “moral” inconsistency?
Though there is little actual intelligence in all this, there is certainly a rationale, even if it is a dumb one. The prog has a basic understanding, gained from years of propaganda, that populations are growing throughout the world, that they are poor and oppressed, and that the White world is rich and shouldn’t be, and honestly maybe just shouldn’t exist—it’s too racist. It is therefore only “logical” that non-Whites should be adopted here. Why make more babies when there are plenty already out there?
Why not bring that excess population here where it is not overpopulated, which will solve all of our own “problems” too? In fact, because the world is a “global village,” in the prog mind, it is not really “foreign” children that are being adopted at all—just more global citizens. He thinks that he is just fixing the Malthusian problem of overpopulation that should be an equal concern to all of us. Some are having barely any children and some are having a litter. The Outside has a large young population that is poor, and we have a low birthrate and aging population that is rich. It’s elementary.
In the cavity between the prog’s ears he notes that we still need people!
He knows little of the world, and cares even less, but in his own guilty mind he can add to the Global Village project. White women don’t have kids, they have abortions and fur babies. Adopting a Chinese girl— out of the millions left behind— is an act of empathy that is going to solve the problems of “peoplekind,” in the word of Justin Trudumb. Some form of the West gets to continue, with people, just without the cruel immorality of staying White!
Killing babies is a White thing, a right and personal choice of White women, not a campaign to correct overpopulation imbalances in certain parts of the world, lessening the need for adoptions. Abortion is not a United Nations stratagem to prevent an impending environmental disaster precipitating future conflict, caused by women in Africa and the Middle East who breed like mice. No, extracting the population from places where things are bad and bringing them to a much better world is one of the few ways to help the suffering of these people without having to bring up the uncomfortable subject of encouraged site-specific population reduction. It is an example of the logic of progressivism that abortion is a “right” fought for not in non-White countries where it is needed, but specifically in the West where it is not, at a time when there are such low birthrates. Prog logic is closer to the idea of bringing people over to Politico-rectopia where, over time, they will, adopting the culture, have less children.
A White woman’s “right” to an abortion is more important than maintaining our existence in the West. Non-White populations and their promotion, without interference, is a greater moral necessity than a “woman’s right” to an abortion in those countries.
If you adopt a foreign child people will think that not only are you helping these unwanted children but you are also helping out these countries by skimming off all the overstock. And in the eyes of the prog you are making the world—in his mind just the West—a more diverse place, as it should be. Race doesn’t matter for Whites, so we can just replenish our diminishing supply of people with all the other children in the world, birthed by people who do care about who they are. Abortion gives us freedom and foreign adoption gives us morality.
Child poaching has been made even more fashionable through its adoption by various celebrities as a cure for their “White guilt.” Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have tried to avoid the “too exclusive Whites” club and mitigate their image of racist narcissism by the addition of a global shades-of-brown litter. You see that White families who fear they may be “looking too perfect” like to add a little darkness to appear and feel more “representative” and “diverse.”
It’s never enough. Shitlibs change everything and then insist more change is necessary in order not to single out and offend the change— shitlib logic.
Westerners certainly take for granted that they are always bringing a better life to a child even if it is only one in a million they are helping out. The prog is not actually helping the situation at all, he just makes it personal. Why help Africa if you have already taken the job of adopting a human being from that continent, Madonna? All debts are paid. One child is good enough. Remember, once again, it’s your mindset that is important. Conditions on the ground elsewhere in the world hardly matter, whether they really are bad, or are improving such that adoption isn’t actually that necessary. Putting your Black baby on display is far better than caring for the whole of Africa. The prog, the White liberal supremacist bastard that he is, is very unlikely to ever perceive that a child might be better off left alone.
Chinese girls are adopted because of their large numbers and unwanted status due to the preference for boys in a country with, until recently, a one-child-policy (in truth it was only the rural poor that had to conform to this); but I wonder if in the near future this action might not be viewed as unfair and a disadvantage to the child who would be missing out on the benefits of a strict Chinese upbringing. You won’t learn how to play the piano and violin and make it into medical school if you get adopted. Adoption is supposed to benefit the child—not just please the desperate would-be parents. The Chinese adoptee will no longer belong to a country that will be the next superpower. Their future success and identity is retarded by a Western upbringing. This could even become a political issue. They might be better left alone to grow up Chinese, get rich, and then move to the West.
Unfortunately, given the Chinese attitude toward race, it is not possible that you could be so lucky as to be adopted by them.
This is not about the Chinese girl anyway, it’s about the prog who is trying to prove to us that foreigners are human beings. He wants us to see them, forcing us to be less “closed-minded”—the “better class” is teaching us something. The prog is nothing if not condescending. It never crosses his mind to think that we already know about the world’s diversity and humanness (in fact, we would know the Other better if we first had a strong sense of ourselves).
The mess created by the “prog experiment” can often be solved by bringing in the outside world. You can reach out into the world for the flesh you don’t have, as regards not just children but women as well. An example is the man who poaches women from the Outside world because they are more “traditional,” younger, and more agreeable; he can’t seem to get the same thing within Politico-rectopia from home-grown girls anymore. No matter how much you try to tell these men that we no longer live in a visual world but an “acoustic” one; at least according to one of the grand wizards of the new society, Marshal McLueless; he just can’t seem to stop noticing that things are better elsewhere. Trans this and trans that, it is easier to just trans-fer something to here from over there.
It is a theme in my books that because you can’t be perfect you have to gain strong points where you can. Like the former Anglo-World political leaders Sarah Palin and David Cameron, a downie child can balance out your “conservative” Whiteness. You need this gimmick to look less like a grug brained redneck. You do not have the natural coolness of Barack Obama. Playing the saxophone like former U.S. President Bill Clinton doesn’t cut it anymore either. If you’re going to be White and political, you’ve got to prove you hate the White part about yourself. As I’ve been trying to make clear in my books, as time goes on, your generation and those coming behind you are going to have to do more and more to please the prog.
You could go to a hundred Bollywood films, dye your hair pink, and be as nice as Mother Teresa, yet nothing can substitute for having an actual non-White child with you all the time. Nobody needs to know that the child was in fact adopted from somewhere in Politico-rectopia, and not from another country —the child’s race is what matters, not whether you are in fact helping the world.
Multiculturalism (and foreign adoption) changes nothing about the world, except it makes the First World more like the Third, and spreads population increase everywhere. But the point has never been to solve any problem, it is only to show where your mind is at.
You will be happy to know that in this case you can do just as the celebs do and bring a splash of pluralism to your otherwise boring White family.
Immigration is a no-go area for debate, but if you did happen to be concerned about open borders, illegals, jobs, and so on, the only way you could do so is with a visible commitment to the right side of history: by having a “diverse” baby of your own. Until you can get more involved in helping out refugees and immigrants in such a personal way, adopting children gives proof that you are not hostis humani generis (“an enemy of the human race”).
Making a logical argument that you are pro-choice for Africa and pro-life in the West might get you asked a question like reporter Barbara Walters, asked Donald Trump: “Are you a bigot?”