Posted on 05/12/2005 12:17:30 PM PDT by Wallace T.
WESTERN EUROPE
It is likely Western Europe will slowly be Islamicized over the next two centuries, even in time the remoter areas like Norway, Ireland, and Portugal, as Muslim populations, through high birthrates and immigration, surpass the numbers of native Europeans. Only if the Muslims become more secular, in the manner of many Turkish Muslims, by several generations in Western Europe will that region avoid becoming Austro-stan, Belgo-stan, Holland-stan, etc. What might eventuate will be some sort of hybrid Euro-Middle Eastern culture, such as Albania and Bosnia have today. Both those nations, formerly purely European racially and at least nominally Christian, became Islamic under Turkish rule between the 15th and 19th Centuries, also absorbing their Turkish conquerors via intermarriage. That may be a model for Western Europe in the 21st and 22nd Centuries.
EASTERN EUROPE
Eastern Europe may remain ethnically intact, as their weak economies have drawn few immigrants. However, as long as a Communist worldview lingers on, as evidenced by still largely socialist economies, low birth rates, and widespread nostalgia for the "good old days" of the KGB and the Gulag, it is unlikely Russia, her former satellites, and the ex-Soviet republics will amount to a center of creativity or economic vigor.
THE USA AND THE "WHITE" COMMONWEALTH NATIONS
North America and Australia/New Zealand are most likely to be Brazilianized, with the former white majorities becoming minorities. Especially in the United States, increased intermarriage of lower status whites with lower status Hispanics, Southeast Asians, and blacks will create a large "mestizo/mulatto" (mixed race) population that may, by 2150 or so, become the largest single population group. (This will remain true even if Hispanic militants manage to detach the Southwestern states from the Union.) The upper and middle classes will remain mostly white, but with considerable admixture with Northeast Asians of second generation or longer residence. There will probably be minority white groups remaining, isolated from the general population by either religion (Mormons, conservative homeschooling evangelicals, "rad-trad" Catholics, and orthodox Jews (assuming the last group does not emigrate to Israel)) or by geography, especially in rural Canada and the northern tier of the U.S.
This may not be the best outcome for Western civilization and its long range future, but I believe it is the most probable one.
Assuming all trends hold for 200 years.
There will be a lot of wars and revolutions in the meantime. Maybe even another Hitler or Napoleon or Stalin. Oil will run out. Muslim birthrates are already declining. Some white birthrates are exploding. Christian evangelicals have having some success in Islamic countries and may explode if democracy takes hold...
Lifestyle, disease, poor hygiene, will change these demographics.
While I agree with some of your points, somehow your "research" creeps me out.
Wow! This is amazing! Who knew my parents were of a lower status OMG! Thanks for telling me. My boyfriend is white but I think I'll get on birth control so as to avert this unmentionable disaster.
I get from this the same old crap that white people are just plain bad and deserve to die.
If Western Civilization, if I "get the drift" of your analysis, means "white," then you are probably right. However, if you mean the legacy of Western civilization, the great threat to this legacy than birthrate is secularism. Because that effects not only the birthrate, but also the passing on of that legacy. Western civilization shouldn't be a "whites only" thing, but something whose influence should be felt worldwide, and to a certain extent, it has.
Except for traditionalist (Tridentine Rite) Catholics, who only number a few hundred in any given metropolitan area, I can't think of any whites who are having large families. Of whom do you speak?
I guess that makes me part of this group. My mother is the daughter of a Polish immigrant and a man whose family (if you take it furthest back) has been here since colonial times. My dad is from the Philippines.
Some social conservative Protestants have huge families too.
Mostly conservative Christians (all races) - Baptists, Mormons, etc. Utah is one of the fastest growing states due to native born Americans having so many children...
Wouldnt be the first time the Muslims/Arabs have wiped out races.....Egyptians, Babylonians/Chaldeans...The Persians still exist but are Muslim so i dont know if that counts.
Except for traditionalist (Tridentine Rite) Catholics, who only number a few hundred in any given metropolitan area, I can't think of any whites who are having large families. Of whom do you speak?
It is not going to take 200 years for this to happen. It will happen before this century is out.
I am concerned about some of your choices of terminology/assumptions. "Lower status whites" are the only ones who cross racial lines in intermarriage? "Conservative homeschooling evangelicals" don't marry across racial lines? "Brazilianized"?
There's a certain flavor to your post that strikes me as subtle racism, dressed up as demographics.
Maybe I'm off base, but I'd like to see documentation for several of the assumptions you seem to rely upon for your conclusions.
Anyway, here's my projection. In Europe, I think that the immigrants expansion rate will slow down somewhat. There will be some brain drain to the United States, Canada, Australia and NZ from Germany, France, etc. Not a lot of people, but a lot of the entrepreneurial class. Western European economies will more or less stagnate without meaningful reforms, which the elderly and pensioners will resist, and they're a big voting bloc. Population in these countries will also fall, furthering the economic stagnation. But they're not going to become third world, they're just going to become like, say, Austria. Picturesque countries without a lot of innovation.
In the US, I think we'll see whites drop to about 60% or so, but in the long term not going a lot lower than that. There'll be some white immigration from poorer economies, and some of the hispanics will integrate into "white" society. While the first generation, and maybe the second generation will tend to stay closer to their Central American roots, the kids and grandkids will want to integrate into American white society: that's where the jobs are, that's where the entertainment is, etc. Hopefully, we can get them used to speaking English early. Too much bilingualism is going to make a mess later on, but it looks like the tide has turned against bilingualism at least somewhat.
I don't know much about the situation in Australia/NZ. I'm not terribly worried that whites are going to become a minority in a strange land: sure, whites are going to drop, but it's not going to result in the end of the world.
Several of the old tobacco farming families (5th generation and more) in my area have hispanic daughters-in-law. But, maybe this area is different. These same old families (and virtually everone else who is "from" here) claim or can document some native American ancestry. Also, most are just a generation or two removed from subsistence farming. So, dispite the language and culture differences, I just don't think these folks, and I'm one of them, see a huge difference between themselves and the Mexicans who began coming here in the 70's as migrant farm workers and eventually settled down here. It's not the end of the world. It's not even the end of "southern culture," because the putative "mestizo" children of these families are just as tied to the land and to their church as their ("white") grandparents are.
bookmark
This is an accurate description of my family and myself. Now, what exactly do you intend to do with us. I think it is high time for a discussion of just this. Skirting the edges of the issue may be good for building tensions and distrust but it is time to put your cards on the table. BTW, we are firm supporters of the second amendment.
"This is an accurate description of my family and myself."
There are very few, whose family lines can be traced back to the Revolutionary War or before, who could claim to be "pure" anything... White, Black, Native or Hispanic (and yes, there are Hispanic families in the continental US going back that far). While I'm not sure that the author intended a slur here, it is a slur nonetheless.
Crusades ping.
I suspect that your projection for the U.S. will occur prior to 2100 - and perhaps as early as 2050. As for Western Europe....one can hear the fat mullah singing already.
,,, above all, the certainty will remain that taxation will still exist.
I did state that there would be increasing levels of marriage between lower income whites and blacks, Hispanics, and Southeast Asians. The latter three groups (and American Indians) tend to be in the lower strata of American society. There is plenty of evidence that interracial marriages are increasing, as well as non-marriage relationships that result in children being born. Census figures and state vital statistics attest to this occurrence.
Because of better education and self-discipline, immigrants from Northeast Asia (and India as well) tend to rise quickly into the professional ranks. Two common visions of early 21st Century American life are those of a working class single white mother taking care of her part-black children and the Asian teenager chosen as valedictorian in the local high school. The white woman may have had ancestors who came to America on the Mayflower, and the Asian kid may have emigrated from India 12 years ago with his parents. But 20 years from now, the immigrant valedictorian may be the supervisor or the landlord of the Mayflower descendants. This is not a new phenomenon in American history, as can be seen by the phenomenal success of Eastern European Jews, compared with other ethnic groups that came to America in the 1880-1920 era.
Using the analogy of Americans whose background was in the Eastern European Jewish communities for Northeast Asian and South Asian immigrants, it is likely that they will be assimilated into the upper and middle classes. This is already beginning to occur. White men married to Chinese-American or Korean-American women are not an uncommon sight in middle class suburbs, and the percentage of white-Asian intermarriage is on the rise, per vital statistics records. Consider that daughters of John Kennedy and Al Gore are married to Jewish men. The Kennedys (or, more accurately, the Bouvier and Auchincloss families from which Jackie Kennedy came) and the Gores are what used to be called society. In the 1930s, marriage to a Jew was unthinkable in society ranks, and a genteel anti-Semitism was the norm among wealthy non-Jews. In the early 21st Century, at least one half of Jewish marriages involve a non-Jewish spouse.
To continue the Jewish-Asian analogy, there is the likelihood of interracial marriage of higher status whites with Northeast Asians and South Asians among the upper and middle classes. Inasmuch as Asians represent a major portion of the population of cities like Vancouver, BC, and San Francisco, the likelihood is that the local elites will be at least partly Northeast Asian in the near term, say 2025.
The "Brazilinization" term is generally accurate in that in Brazil, the upper classes are mostly white, the middle class is largely mixed race, and the lower classes largely black. The same is true with Mexico, except that Indians, not blacks, represent the lower rungs of society. It is inaccurate to the extent that the upper and middle classes will have considerable Northeast Asian and Asian Indian intermixture. In Latin American societies, Jews, Chinese, and other affluent ethnic groups tend to maintain separate communities. My guess is that separatism of this sort will not happen in the United States and Canada.
The Muslims may win Western Europe by default. If the second and third generation Middle Easterners and North Africans become sufficiently Europeanized and rejective of militant Islam, they may intermarry with the remaining old stock Europeans. The net result will be that Western Europe will be Albanianized, with a mixed population and perhaps a milder, Ataturk variety of Islam as the prevalent religion.
As for North America, whites are currently in the minority (though still the largest minority) in California and are also so in New Mexico and Hawaii. In this decade, whites will become a minority in Texas and Arizona. However, the Hispanic population has expanded well beyond its old stronghold in the Southwest into the Northeast and even Canada.
What this means in terms of population change can be seen in Texas. Prior to the Mexican Revolution in the 1910s, Hispanics were few in number north of San Antonio. By the 1980s, they had become the second largest ethnic group in the state, surpassing African-Americans in numbers. Despite large in-migration into Texas of people from other states, high birthrates and immigration have enabled the proportion of Mexican-Americans to increase relative to the general population. What happened and is happening in Texas from 1910 to 2010 could be replicated in, say, Missouri or Georgia from 1970 to 2070.
There is, like it or not, little political will to curb immigration, legal or otherwise, into the United States. Whether we are dealing with pro-business Republicans or pro-multiculturalist Democrats, both parties are dominated by opponents of rest ricing immigration. Practically speaking, the only effective curbs on immigration are the ability of people to pay for the trip. Traveling from China or India to the U.S. is far more expensive and straining on family and friendship ties than traveling from Mexico or Central America. Thus, emigrants from Asia are more likely to be well educated and have more financial resources than their Latin American counterparts. There will also be fewer Asians than Latin Americans as well.
As a result, much of the United States will either become Hispanic in culture or a "metsizo" majority may arise, mostly in the lower classes as is the case in Mexico, with a "Spanglish" culture and work ethic. (The Mexican elite is overwhelmingly white, and mostly of Spanish ancestry.)
I guess your terminology throws me when you say things like "higher status" or "lower status" or "elite" without making it absolutely clear that you're referring to economic status and not some subjective preference or dislike for certain groups. You know what you meant, but if I were you I'd be fanatically careful to throw that word "economic" in there every time, to avoid misunderstandings and adverse reactions like mine.
With the all the racists out there, your choice of wording was sending me "danger signals". I'll assume it was merely a little sloppiness on your part and that your agenda is not one of racism.
Certainly watching and trying to predict the demographic trends is interesting.
I'm a New Zealander with Chinese origin, and my comment for NZ is that ethnic notions are more entrenched in New Zealand than the United States. In addition, the Europeans/Pakeha divide themselves between Anglo and Irish descents and those from other parts of Europe (Italian, Dalamtian, Spanish descendents). Even if you are white, if you are Dutch Kiwis will look at you efefctively no different from the way they look at Koreans. But in New Zealand, assimilation does not only involve values as does America, it means adopting wholescale lifestyles of British-derived New Zealand culture like eating meat pies, playing rugby, DIY gardening etc. Once you become assimilated to this degree, at least in times when recent migrants with the same ethnic group as yours are scarce, New Zealanders accept you as their own. But you are never accepted if you dare to "raise your head" in NZ society.
At the other side of the coin, indigenous Maori has an important status in NZ society. And Pacific Islanders are widely accepted into the mainstream at least in Auckland (I was told it was not so in Wellington or the South Island). To a degree, intermarriage is already happening between part Maori, Pacific Islanders and Euroepans. Chinese also marry Europeans (and probably not Pacific Islanders and/or Maori), while for Indians perhaps we will have to wait for another generation or two.
My prediction in 30 years' time? Half of Chinese and Koreans will be back in Korea, Southeast Asia or Greater Chinese region (mainalnd China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan) in 25 years time and the figure could rise to 80% of the Communists in China become toppled, 25% will be in Australia, and half of the 25% remaining will keep in marrying Chinese spouses while the other half could have European spouses. And 20% of Europeans would have moved permanently to Australia, Britain, or the US, leaving a significant larger proportion (35%?) of NZ residents as Maori or Pacific Islanders.
>Western Europe will slowly be Islamicized over the next two >centuries
>It is not going to take 200 years for this to happen. It will >happen before this century is out.
You want to see what happens when you try to fuse three major cultures together look to Bosnia. When you try to fuse the Russian Serb Orthodox Cyrillic Eastern Europe culture with the Turkish based Muslim culture and the Western European Catholic culture you get chaos.
Trust me, I was there when Tito died.
Actually the immigration from Latin America to Europe is bigger than that from the middle east: 300k-400k a year just to Spain. Communities from China ,India Bangladesh are growing particulary strong , and they integrate quite fast into the economic,political systems: you can found Chinatowns in unlikely places like sleepy,millennia old Italian towns.
The Islamization of Europe can't be given from granted, albeit France is at risk (8% of Muslim population by now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.