“Those who make peaceful de-Islamization impossible make violent de-Islamization inevitable.”
Thanks toÂ Andrew Bolt
The US National Intelligence Council in itsÂ Global Trends 2025Â report warns that Europe faces even more trouble between Muslims and non-Muslims – and that the US and Israel may pay for the Islamisation of the continent:
Western Europe’s Muslim population currently totals between 15 and 18 million… If current patterns of immigration and Muslim residents’ above-average fertility continue, Western Europe could have 25 to 30 million Muslims by 2025.
* Some people would argue that EUrabia has that many already!
Countries with growing numbers of Muslims will experience a rapid shift in ethnic composition, particularly around urban areas, potentially complicatingÂ efforts to facilitate assimilation and integration. Economic opportunities are likely to be greater in urban areas, but, in the absence of growth in suitable jobs, the increasing concentrationÂ could lead to more tense and unstable situations, such as occurred with the 2005 Paris surburban riots.
Slow overall growth rates, highly regulated labor markets, and workplace policies, if maintained, will make it difficult to increase job opportunities, despite Europe’s need to stem the decline of its working-age population. When coupled with job discrimination and educational disadvantage, these factors are likely to confine many Muslims to low-status, low-wage jobs,Â deepening ethnic cleavages. Despite a sizeable stratum of integrated Muslims, a growing numberâ€”driven by a sense of alienation, grievance, and injusticeâ€”areÂ increasingly likely to value separation in areas with Muslim-specific cultural and religious practices….
Ongoing societal and political tension over integration of Muslims is likely to make European policymakers increasingly sensitive to the potential domestic repercussions of any foreign policies for the Middle East, includingÂ aligning too closely with the US on policies seen as pro-Israeli.
5 thoughts on “Europe’s new religious strife”
* efforts to facilitate assimilation and integration
Exercise in futility – iron will not alloy with clay, now how much jizyah & dhimmitude they
throw into the cauldron.
Unfortunately, statistics often count Muslims the same way that Muslims do; if they were born Muslim or are descended from a Muslim immigrant they are put in the Muslim sum total regardless of how they self-identify. If you compare the statistics for the number of Muslims with the surveys that actually ask people what religion they are there is a massive discrepancy. Either the “total Muslims” number is being vastly overstated or the Muslim apostasy rate is much greater than is being acknowledged. Or both.
As Mullah Lodabullah (hehe) notes Islam won’t alloy with Western society but fortunately people are easier to convert than substances. In order to get a clear picture of Islamic immigrants and their effect on the future of a society you need to take a few things into account:
Third generation immigrants are more representative of the future of a group than the second generation. They also happen to be more likely (usually high nineties percent) to be uni-lingual in the host nation’s language, reliably employed have higher education, live outside traditional immigrant communities, have fertility rates much closer to the general population and such. I would not be surprised if the rate of apostasy is also much higher in third generation immigrants than second though this needs to be studies in detail.
And when studying second and third generation immigrant populations, it is important (though more difficult) to compare the stats of today’s third generation with their parents’ and grandparents’ generations’ otherwise you mask trends that occur over generations of immigrant experience. Since an average new immigrant today may be less religious and more educated than the grandparent of today’s 3rd gen immigrant, comparing today’s 1st and 3rd gens could make a secularizing trend appear to be reversed.
Rates total of fertility in the Islamic nations have begun falling and their employment rate is rising. Evidence from the Mexican/American immigration trend seems to suggest to me that high immigration does not continue if the jobs are not there. And the sources of immigrants to Europe are diversifying towards non Islamic nations. Chinese and Brazilian immigrants to Europe are not going to be as willing to play dhimmi even as they move into traditional immigrant (lower income) regions.
There will certainly be tensions between Muslim and non-Muslim communities in 2025 but the only Eurabia will be south of the Mediterranean.
given that third generation immigrants are more representative of the future disposition of a particular cultural groups I am more than a little concerned. A significant portion of the islamic violence today is indeed perpetrated by third or second generation individuals. And I suspect that the motivation for migration may not be economic, which then places the conclusions of your second last paragraph in question. I agree with the first part of last paragraph, but about Eurarabia I suspect that we do have a fight on our hands to prevent Arabs from stealing our countries. I might also add a significant part of the problem is the attitude of many important left-wing politicians who seem to be unable to comprehend that, at least during this part of mans development, some cultures simply cannot mix.
“A significant portion of the islamic violence today is indeed perpetrated by third or second generation individuals.”
Second generation I would grant you but I am not yet convinced about there being a significant problem with third generations immigrants. And the fact that it is the second generation where problems are seen is not really indicative of a worsening problem. They are the children of immigrants from earlier days when people with poor language skills, low job skills and other disadvantages. Earlier waves of immigrants to Western nations like the eastern Europeans to America have been romanticized and often the second generation immigrants had much lower literacy rates, higher fertility rates, were more religiously strict (to the point of superstition in many cases) than the third generation. People of the time had the same concerns of them being resistant to assimilation and it is only after the third generation began to show significant success stories that the myth of the overnight success of immigrants in an immigrant friendly nation became widespread.
I do not want to give the impression that I don’t feel there can be a case made for slowing immigration from single source nations like the Middle East and North Africa or that Islamism should not be confronted as a serious problem just as street crime, organized crime and other dangerous ideologies should be. Infact, the process of assimilation can act as a distillation process where moderates and the sane are pushed out and marginalized leaving a residue of hard core true believers. But there are significant trends going on within all societies that Islamic communities are not immune to. Building mega mosques today will not guarantee mega congregations an couple decades from now. These trends are often obscured by the way we compare demographic data.
A very valid point, Saul.
The problem remains that there is no country in the world were Muslims ever integrated or assimilated. Islam is to dominate and not to be dominated. The Muslim is religiously obliged to kill and die for Allah until the world is Islamic. How do you deal with that?
Comments are closed.