Ah, let’s see …
One counter to the [Mark] Steynian Europe-is-doomed scenario has been offered by columnist and author Ralph Peters. In a November 2006 New York Post column titled “The ‘Eurabia’ Myth,” Peters prophesied that John/Jean/Josef/José/Giuseppe Q. European will eventually get in touch with his inner fascist:
Don’t let Europe’s current round of playing pacifist dress-up fool you: This is the continent that perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing, the happy-go-lucky slice of humanity that brought us such recent hits as the Holocaust and Srebrenica. The historical patterns are clear: When Europeans feel sufficiently threatened — even when the threat’s concocted nonsense — they don’t just react, they over-react with stunning ferocity.
— We Are Doomed, Chapter 11
Most of the attempts of the lefties to pin this attack on immigration restrictionism are bunk. The arguments are right or wrong on their own. However, there is a penchant to push a despairing view of the world that I imagine could have contributed to this disaster. Peters' quote follows along the same lines here. The truth is that there are growing democratic movements to reform immigration, no need for terrorism. Of course, now those movements that will suffer thanks to Breivik awful and his unjustifiable massacre.
The one lesson I'd take away from this is lay off the doom. Clever book titles notwithstanding, there's a lot of life left in the U.S. and the West as a whole.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI was roundly pilloried by some Euro-acquaintances for suggesting precisely that in light of recent events.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAbsolutely true.
I remember visiting Sarajevo in 1984 (Winter Olympics) and being shocked by how these seemingly peaceful people could commit such horrendous crimes just a few years later.
Europe as whole as been on a downward trajectory for quite some time, and the EU Debt Crisis is only going to hasten the demise. The fact that Norway (highest per capita GDP in Europe; relatively low immigration levels) experienced this now is not very promising for the future of less economically stable European nations with even greater internal tensions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think a bit of statistics are in order. From there people can draw thier own conclusions. Demographically, any society needs a Total Fertility Rate of 2.1 live births per female in order to keep its population stable. This of course does not factor in immigration. Europe taken as a whole has a TFR variant of 1.5 live births per female. In 1980 it was 2.0. If Europe's population is for instance 100, with 51 females to 49 males, Europe's population would decrease by 24% in the next generation if trends continue.And what is also important to realize is that the number of females would also go down in proportion. A society with a decrease in the number of females from generation to generation is in a death spiral. Without immigration Europe's population would certainly fall. Yet, even with immigration Europe's birthrates remain catastrophic. I read one statistic that has Germany's population dropping 25 million by 2050. The numbers don't lie.
We're looking at an economic and demographic collapse in the coming 2 decades. Europe is doomed. Japan has already reached the demographic point of no return. It is losing over 100,000 people a year. Deflation is the first sign of problems. And Japan definitely has a deflationary problem.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJPK: Don't disagree with your numbers.
However, do disagree with your statement (and Steyn says it as well) that Japan has reached the demographic point of no return.
How is this possible if there still Japanese females of pregnancy age?
It seems to me that all it would take to reverse the downward native population of any country would be that the women of a single generation start having more than 2.1 births per female.
Why wouldn't that increase population if having less than 2.1 per female decreases population?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat did Tom Wolfe say? "fascism is always descending in America but actually landing in Europe"? Or something to that end?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseVery true of the French, but Scandanavians? I'm not so sure. And German men pee sitting down these days, 'nuf said.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm currently reading up on the origins of World War I. It was started for far fewer reasons than exist now. This may be a prophetic article.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think it's worth pointing out what Steyn's actual views on this subject are: he sees a good chance that Europe will get in touch with it's Fascist past; he just thinks that the Fascists will lose to the Islamists.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell we're still learning about Breivik and his creed, and about how much of his violence was motivated by politics and how much was simply motivated by a violent nature, but there is this lesson to be learned: if you keep telling people that perfectly reasonable views are "extremist," the time may come when they'll act as if they are.
Wanting to reduce immigration is not extremist. Wanting to eliminate immigration by culturally incompatible populations is not extremist. Opposing government-imposed multiculturalism in the schools is not extremist. But the Left was worked mightily over the last 3+ decades to ban these views from discussion in polite society, and to even ban the democratic majority's ability to act upon these views (e.g., Plyler v. Doe).
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse