Abortion is a very stupid way to carry out birth control: it takes up time in recovery, so being economically wasteful; it carries certain inherent risks, as all surgical procedures do; and as with any invasive procedure—no matter how greatly improved—it leaves scars, of various kinds. Notably, abortion was the primary form of birth control in the USSR; and this makes perfect sense: the Soviet system, as with all socialist systems, incentivised high time-preference behaviour. Abortion is birth control for the short-sighted, and under socialism everyone is incentivised to be short-sighted about everything—even how and when they have babies.
Even today, our own progressive left likes to mention the USSR’s generous abortion provision as an advantage, and I suppose the improvident would prefer it that way: no need to even worry about condoms or the pill—there is always a free abortion on hand. As a supplemental point, I think there was an attraction to abortion in the Soviet mind due to its 19th-century outlook: the Soviets were about electricity and giant factories—naturally, they would prefer a mechanical operation, preferably mediated by stainless steel, for birth control; perhaps they enjoyed the sadism, too. The West, as it pressed ahead under a less socialised regime, developed the pill as an alternative—an advance more in line with a genuinely progressive cybernetic sensibility that could deal with actual biology.
Indeed, while contemporary progressives are still reluctant to overly criticise the USSR—always quick to point to free kindergartens and medical care—there is one socialist regime they are happy to condemn: Ceaușescu’s Romania. And why would that be so? Quite simply because Ceaușescu banned abortion—the beast—and tried, as with Mao, to boost the country’s population no matter what. This is leftist delusion in another direction: you cannot have too many Romanians—people in general—since all people have the same capacities and abilities; not to grow, in cancer-like fashion, would be a crime. Consequently, the hedonistic left dislikes Ceaușescu—his nationalistic inclinations—because he reduced irresponsibility in a certain direction (well, not entirely; instead of subsidised abortions Romania produced subsidised orphanages—places that often made abortion look preferable, especially when the orphans were ravaged by HIV).
People who think ahead—people with a minimal intelligence level—just do not need abortion as birth control; indeed, even if no other methods are available people with any wit will notice that coitus interruptus exists. This is why so-called sex education is sinister; people can figure this out quite well enough without a lesson—and so sex education does not exist to teach people how to avoid pregnancies; it exists to indoctrinate children into something else, although what that “something” will be varies with ideological trends.
So, in the US, abortion has a eugenic effect, albeit unintended; the people who tend to resort to abortion are less intelligent and less capable of advanced planning—and so, given the racial distribution of intelligence, black women are more likely to have abortions. Those Christians who oppose abortion have noticed this fact and will often say, “It’s progressive eugenics! They’re racists!” What interests here is their willingness to use arguments that are progressive (what did Christ care for “racism”?); they are not so Christian and are eager to play the progressive game when they get a chance (“At last!”). Their rhetoric is futile: “racism” means what progressives want it to mean; and progressives have no concern for the blacks or homosexuals—any of their pet causes—anyway (in fairness, no anti-abortion activist cares about foetuses either; nobody cares about other people’s children, unborn or otherwise).
Given that abortion is a pretty grizzly business, one that certainly damages women psychologically—if not biologically—it would be better to promote voluntary sterilisation. Offer £5,000 for each person who sterilises and the short-sighted, greedy for cash, will do it. Abortion can then be reserved for those severe medical emergencies where we have to choose between the mother’s life and the baby.