Demographics Really Is Destiny

Demographics is destiny. It's true that a nation depopulated will not remain a vast empty space. Another people will fill the void, overrunning and dominating the smaller, weaker population. We, in the West, are aborting ourselves out of existence and, like it or not, more confident, vigorous, fecund, and confident in the truth of their religion populations are rapidly filling the void. In America, that population is mostly what is nominated Latino, and in Europe it is Muslim. Do religious people have a greater desire to populate the planet?

Europe is in a fatal downward spiral:

Demographics is destiny. Never in recorded history have prosperous and peaceful nations chosen to disappear from the face of the earth. Yet that is what the Europeans have chosen to do. Back in 1348 Europe suffered the Black Death, a combination of bubonic plague and likely a form of mad cow disease, observes American Enterprise Institute scholar Ben Wattenberg. "The plague reduced the estimated European population by about a third. In the next 50 years, Europe's population will relive - in slow motion - that plague demography, losing about a fifth of its population by 2050 and more as the decades roll on."

In 200 years, French and German will be spoken exclusively in hell. What has brought about this collective suicide, which mocks all we thought we knew about the instinct for self-preservation? The chattering classes have nothing to say about the most unique and significant change in our times. Yet the great political and economic shifts of modern times are demographic in origin.

According to Robert Spengler of AsiaTimes, faith and fecundity go hand in hand:

All the countries with high population growth rates (vertical scale) have an extremely low percentage of non-religious people (horizontal scale), while all the countries with extremely low population growth rates have a high percentage of non-religious people. There are of course some countries (e.g., France and the UK) with population growth rates above zero despite a very large proportion of non-religious. Very high fertility of immigrant populations, though, helps explain why the French and British numbers deviate from the trend. Although a sample of 83 countries permits a great deal of differentiation, the overlap of cultures due to immigration necessarily will lead to some anomalies.

Russia is Europe's population "canary," with the worse-case scenario, now with a population of half that of the United States, the staggering decline is attributed to many factors:

Drug use, alcoholism and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) are leading reasons for the decline, said Murray Feshbach, a senior scholar at the Smithsonian Institution's Woodrow Wilson Center.
"It's mind-boggling, frankly," he said.

About 15% of Russian couples are infertile, he said.
And as many as 75% of women experience serious medical problems during pregnancy.
The official fertility rate - understood as the average number of children a woman has between the ages of 15 and 49 - was 1.17 in 1999.

The minimum rate for a population to replace itself is 2.5, Mr Feshbach said.
"Most people are very pessimistic. They don't believe children will have a future", he said.
While there was a slight increase in the birth rate this year as compared to last year, the death rate increased markedly.
The Russian death rate is now 1.7 times higher than the birth rate.

Male life expectancy in Russia is 59 years,considerably lower than it was in the Soviet Union.

Ironically the republic is surrounded with burgeoning populations in the "stans."
In The Empty Cradle, author, Phillip Longman's asserts that a higher birthrate comes from those individuals that "are at odds with the modern environnment..or who, out of fundamentalist or chauvinistic conviction reject the game altogether."

and

This much is sure: The uneducated have far more children than the educated, and the religiously minded generally have bigger families than do secularists. In the United States, for example, fully 47% of people who attend church weekly say that the ideal family size is three or more children, as opposed to only 27% of those who seldom attend church.

Spengler takes issue with this assertion about the United States:

This much is sure: The uneducated have far more children than the educated, and the religiously minded generally have bigger families than do secularists. In the United States, for example, fully 47% of people who attend church weekly say that the ideal family size is three or more children, as opposed to only 27% of those who seldom attend church.

However, the rising cost of raising a university-educated middle-class child in the U.S. is more than US$1 million, including more than $800,000 in lost wages. Spengler asserts that costs are overcome by other values:

The reader must fall back on his argument that faith, not pecuniary calculation, will motivate today's prospective parents. The reproductive power of an increasingly Christian United States will enhance the strategic position of the US over the next two generations, leaving infertile Western Europe to sink slowly into insignificance.

American middle-class women are having fewer children. Population growth in the United States is being bolstered by the influx of immigrants that are streaming over the border. Should we please or unhappy about this influx of mostly illiterate though hardworking? The Catholic Church and others are cheered that these are mostly Catholic or other Christian denominations of cultures that typically have larger families. Like Europeans, Middle-class families are breeding themselves out of existence and, like it or not, the void is being filled.

Should abortion be used as birth control? Should birth control be used at all? There are as many answers are there are issues that go along with this controversy. Statistics show that Middle-Class families, of all colors, and Caucasoid in particular, simply must have more children to remain a viable force in this country and in the mainstream. Next time a woman considers having a abortion, should she consider whether or not aborting is in the best interest of the United States?