• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

With Declining Birth Rates, Is There Nothing For the First World But ‘Unlimited Mass Migration’? 

Jul 23, 2020 10:00 am By Hugh Fitzgerald

First world countries are suffering from a steady decrease in their fertility rates, and hence their populations. Some “experts” claim the only solution is for limitless immigration from Africa. The story is here.

First world countries must respond to a “jaw-dropping” crash in fertility by totally opening their borders to unlimited mass migration, according to “experts” interviewed by the BBC.

Falling fertility rates are “a success story” because they mean more women are in work and are not having children, according to a report by the BBC published on Wednesday [July 19].

Why are falling fertility rates a “success story”? Why is the fact that women are not having children, or not having as many children as in the past, deemed by some a “success”? Is it not a vote of no confidence in the future? An expression of financial anxieties?

It is shocking, however, that lower fertility rates will result in 23 countries, including Spain and Japan, seeing their populations drop by more than half by 2100, Professor Christopher Murray told the state media organ.

“That’s a pretty big thing; most of the world is transitioning into natural population decline,” the researcher said, adding: “I think it’s incredibly hard to think this through and recognise how big a thing this is; it’s extraordinary, we’ll have to reorganise societies.”

“You might think this is great for the environment. A smaller population would reduce carbon emissions as well as deforestation for farmland,” says the BBC, which has been promoting a “child-free” life to British women for decades as “liberation” and as a means to “save the planet.”

But “who pays tax in a massively aged world?” the state broadcaster asks, going on to tell readers that there must be a massive population transfer from Africa to the first world to make up for a deficit of babies.

If there is to be a “massive population transfer,” why does the BBC insist it must it be from Africa? Why not, for example, have a “massive population transfer” of immigrants from Latin America, whose peoples are Christian, and who do not harbor religious or racial hostility to Europeans? Or Christian and Buddhist immigrants from Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines could form part of that “massive population transfer.”

“Countries, including the UK, have used migration to boost their population and compensate for falling fertility rates,” asserts the BBC, neglecting to mention that third world migration has been a huge net drain on the British treasury.

The UK has not “used migration to boost their population” – as if it were a deliberate policy — but has quite unnecessarily felt an obligation to accept migrants who have managed to make it, legally or illegally, to the U.K. Immigrants are not always and everywhere an unalloyed good; their costs to, and effects on, society, vary considerably. Muslims, in particular, bring with them, undeclared in their mental baggage, an inculcated hatred of Infidels. They arrive as economic migrants – though often claiming to be refugees – and are quick to take advantage of every conceivable benefit that the generous welfare states of Europe offer. Thus many Muslim immigrants receive free or greatly subsidized housing, free medical care, free education, unemployment benefits (even without ever having been employed in their new country), family allowances, and more. All of this is a huge expense. The unemployment rates for Muslims are much higher than those for any other immigrant groups. Some Muslims believe that the non-Muslims among whom they settle owe them a kind of proleptic jizyah, the tax that in Muslim polities Infidels are supposed to pay to the Muslim state as a kind of protection money, allowing them to practice their religion without being harmed. Similarly, the rates of criminality among Muslim immigrants far exceeds those for any other group, immigrant or indigenous, in all the European countries where they now live.

To support this argument [for the need of “a massive population transfer from Africa”], the broadcaster [BBC] speaks to mass migration enthusiast Professor Ibrahim Abubakar from University College London (UCL), who said: “If these predictions are even half accurate, migration will become a necessity for all nations and not an option.”

This last comment — “migration is a necessity for all nations” — makes no sense. If he means “immigration is a necessity for all nations,” then where will those needed immigrants come from? Surely he means that “immigration will become a necessity for all First World nations.”

“To be successful, we need a fundamental rethink of global politics. The distribution of working-age populations will be crucial to whether humanity prospers or withers.”

It’s unsurprising that someone named Ibrahim Abubakar is a “mass migration enthusiast.” But would he be such an enthusiast if the migrants Europe chose to take in were Christians from South America rather than Muslims from North Africa and the Middle East? Or would he deem such a sensible policy to be deeply “racist” and unacceptable?

This sentiment — that mass migration will be mandatory — was echoed in the article by Professor Murray, who told the BBC: “We will go from the period where it’s a choice to open borders, or not, to frank competition for migrants, as there won’t be enough.”

A bidding war for Third World “migrants”? Nonsense. They are desperate to be taken in; hundreds of millions will move heaven and earth to smuggle themselves into the West. And that is what must be prevented. This notion that the advanced nations of Europe and North America will be forced to “compete” for migrants, without being able to take into account the great differences among migrant populations, is absurd. We are able to compare the real costs, including unemployment rates and rates of criminality, of different immigrant groups, as well as the likelihood that real integration into the larger society can take place. By all of these criteria, Muslim immigrants are the most expensive to the state, the most disruptive to the social order, the most physically dangerous to the general population, and the least likely to integrate into the host society. Do we want the U.K. to look ever more like Pakistan, or France more like Algeria, or the Netherlands more like Morocco? Are we allowed to express our dismay at the very idea, or would that be enough to consign us to the outer darkness?

It is curious that both Ibrahim Abubakar and Professor Murray think there is nothing to be done to make up for declining populations other than mass migration, of a kind that would change forever the nature of the host societies, and likely destroy the wellbeing of their indigenous populations.

Noting projections that the population of sub-Saharan Africa is set to treble to over three billion people by the end of this century, he argued that “global recognition of the challenges around racism are going to be all the more critical” in the coming years, stating that large numbers of African migrants and their descendants will be present in “many more countries.”

The tone is one of fatalism: “large numbers of African migrants and their descendants will be present in many more countries” admits of no dissent. Apparently those living in those countries will have no say in the matter. But that future is not a given. It would have been better to have said that “migration [from places yet unspecified] may be useful if the native populations continue to decline in numbers.”

But there are so many other things to consider. For example, for many industrial processes, humans can be replaced by machines. And not just on the factory floor. Machines can replace warehouse workers (Amazon has more than 100,000 robots), farmers, drivers. Artificial intelligence and robotics are an ever-greater part of the advanced world’s economies. All this needs to be factored in when calculating the size of the population that may be needed to keep an economy going.

In addition, the BBC uses the article to stress that first world countries should not try to increase the fertility rate of their native populations, stating that “researchers warn against undoing the progress on women’s education and access to contraception.”

This is both absurd and infuriating. The people in “first world countries” are being told there is nothing they should do to increase their own populations. They are told, peremptorily, by these heedless enthusiasts for mass migration, to accept the replacement of the indigenous populations in the First World by migrants from Africa, and that attempting a pro-natalist policy would actually damage the position of women. We are supposed to believe that by having more children, women in the First World would no longer have access to contraception, or to higher education. They would all be left barefoot and pregnant. But that’s nonsense. No one in the First World will be denied access to contraception. That doesn’t mean it must be used, and indeed birth control should be encouraged, but only for women in the Third World, where women are producing far more children than they can support. It is their fertility rates that we should be worrying about.

As for the claim that an increase in women’s fertility in the First World could stymie the progress made in women’s education – how does this follow? Higher education in the advanced world leads to better economic prospects for women; their higher salaries makes it easier to feed and house larger families and, where necessary, to hire others to help with the children.

What is most maddening is the attempt to bully the West into believing there is nothing it can do, with its declining birth rates, except to throw up its hands and admit large numbers of immigrants from Africa, many or most of whom will be Muslims. Already the large-scale presence of Muslim immigrants in Western Europe has created a situation both for their indigenous hosts, and for other, non-Muslim immigrants, that is far more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous, than would be the case without that large-scale presence.

Many things, other than mass migration from Africa, can be done in the First World to deal with fertility rates falling below replacement levels. Let’s no longer pretend that all immigrants are equally to be welcomed. Muslims cost their host societies far more, in the benefits they require and receive, than do non-Muslim migrants. Muslims have larger families, which means they are entitled to larger dwellings, based on family size, that are either free or greatly subsidized by the state. Their medical costs are higher, too, because of the greater incidence of congenital illnesses, the predictable result of the great frequency of cousin-marriages among Muslims. Muslims exhibit much higher levels of unemployment than non-Muslims in Europe; many seem in no hurry to be gainfully employed, finding that unemployment — together with other benefits — can come close to what they would receive if employed. Consequently, the unemployment benefit systems in Europe are groaning under this new burden. Rates of criminality among Muslim immigrants are also much higher than for any other immigrant group. Think of the total cost to the state this entails, for more police, more detectives, more prosecutors, more court-appointed lawyers, more judges, more prison guards, more prisons. It all adds up.

There are alternative reservoirs of migrants on which the First World countries could rely. I have already mentioned one: the Christian peoples of Mexico, Central, and South America who, unlike Muslims, have not been inculcated with a hatred of European or American Infidels. And these migrants have shown themselves willing to work, and desirous of integrating into, rather than remaining aloof from, the First World countries where they have been allowed to live.

Another pool of migrants who might be given preferential treatment as migrants to Europe are found in the Philippines. Almost 200,000 Christian Filipinos are already working in Italy as care-givers (badante). The shared heritage of Catholicism makes it easier for them to fit into the larger society. Why not let in a great many more Filipino immigrants elsewhere in Europe? Other nationalities that are a possible source of desirable immigrants are refugees — Vietnamese (both Buddhists and Catholics) fleeing religious suppression in Communist Vietnam, and Christian (and Hindu) refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Indonesia, fleeing persecution by Muslims.

But aside from being intelligently selective in the immigrants they allow in, the First World countries should not hesitate to adopt pro-natalist policies of the kind now being tried, with success, in Hungary. In that country, newly-married couples are given an interest-free loan of $36,000 which is cancelled when they have their third child. A woman who has four or more children is then exempt from paying income tax for her entire life. Outright grants – not loans — are given to families for housing; the more children in the family, the greater the size of the grant. Hungary, which had the second-lowest birthrate in the E.U., now has shown a remarkable increase in fertility rates. Between January 2019 and January 2020, the Hungarian birth rate (the number of births per 1,000 people) increased by 9.4 per cent. This increase was reflected in the total fertility rate (the number of babies a woman is expected to have over her lifetime) which increased from 1.4 to 1.6 children (the accepted replacement rate is 2.1). Finally, the number of marriages celebrated in the country has increased in only one year by 100%. The policy seems to be working. And similar pro-natalist policies are being implemented in Poland. Aside from Hungary and Poland, pro-natalist polices are also in effect in France, Greece, Finland, Latvia, Estonia, South Korea, and Japan. These policies need to be studied to find out what works and what doesn’t, and what can be tweaked, and how much the most promising policies cost.

That is the rational approach. The irrational approach is simply to throw up your hands, say that “nothing can be done” to alleviate the problem of declining populations in the First World, save for one thing – “massive migration from Africa.” But pro-natalist policies can work, if well-crafted and sufficiently funded. Along with those policies, First World countries have both a right and a duty to select those immigrants whom, the evidence suggests, will be the least burdensome on their societies, and the most likely to successfully integrate. From sad experience we know whom that excludes.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Eurabia, Featured, Hugh Fitzgerald, immigration Tagged With: Christopher Murray, Ibrahim Abubakar


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. mortimer says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 10:19 am

    Muslim births are also dropping as girls are educated throughout the Muslim world. They will eventually stabilize.

    While Muslims in America are mostly becoming well-educated and accomplished, and are mostly assimilating as more or less loyal Americans, there are many other Muslims who are determined NOT to assimilate and NOT be loyal to the country that gave them so many blessings. We see partial or ‘half-assimilation’ in the Tsarvaev terrorist family of Boston Marathon infamy. Even nominally Muslim friends of Dzhokar Tsarnaev helped him in covering up his evil deeds.

    When the shooting starts, how many American Muslims will fight to stop the jihadists? This is a question they must answer clearly. France is realizing that Islam is an un-friendly ideology to France. They have tried as Leftards to accommodate the Muslims in France and the result has been continuous jihadism.

    France, perhaps better than other countries, has an intellectual tradition of analysis that could destroy Islam forever, if the French government realized that that is in their best interest ultimately to do so. The ideological deconstruction of Islam will make many Muslims to see that Islam hasn’t an intellectual leg to stand on.

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 10:04 pm

      And Mortimer, more than half of Muslims in the United States want to see brutal Shari’ah law imposed here.

      As for France, I’m afraid that the huge numbers of ravening Muslims flooding in there may overcome that civilized nation before her tradition of reason has a chance to influence Muslims, who reject reason in any case.

  2. mortimer says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 10:28 am

    So the ‘success’ of women having careers instead of children means the ‘failure’ of having a dropping birthrate. Let’s question this paradox.

    Why would migrants who have nothing in common with Western countries, but rather hate those Western cultures, become loyal citizens?

    Why is constant expansion of the economy without an end to be desired? When is growth ‘enough’?

    Why is the destruction of national cultures a desirable thing for the Left?

    There are Leftists who claim that their goal is the elimination of the white race. They may have their way within 100 years. But there may just be a change in the currently Leftard culture of the West that will lead people back to an appreciation for cultures.

    The Leftards generally have no or few children. They will leave behind few indoctrinated in their beliefs. The zeitgeist of the West may then swing back to tradition.

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 10:08 pm

      I don’t think we want to prevent women from having careers–if you want that, Islam is the creed for you…

  3. Michael Copeland says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:05 am

    Warning:
    Africans are very very good at making more Africans.

    • craig says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 3:13 pm

      True. Sub Saharan African nations have the highest fertility rates in the world. But this is often offset by higher infant mortality rates. If we want lower birth rates in these countries(and we should want them everywhere) it should be western policy to see that these countries undergo genuine economic reform and growth. That will be the end of it. You’ll see the birth rate in Niger go from 7 per woman to less than 3 in a generation. No more foreign aid.

  4. Dalian Tang says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:06 am

    While you’re at it, you can promote “Camp of the Saints” in the Books section

  5. Honest Ali says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:20 am

    It is a Big Lie that the First World has fertility problems. We have a sustainable birthrate, and we are largely having only the children we can responsibly raise. We are responsible, and we control our sex drives and reproduction. And we have humanized sex, as a consensual sharing among equals.

    The “Refusing-To-Develop-World” that willfully refuses to develop any ethics or standard of living… and worse, which seeks to tear the First World down, instead of building itself up… are the ones with an irresponsible, criminally abusive, unsustainable birth rate, because they refuse to use birth control or control their sex drives. For them, sex is simply an animal release with no though of consequences, or the consent of the woman.

    That is why they have a metastasizing birth rate. And they only seek our land to destroy us, because they HATE Liberty and Equality.

    • Carl -stealth Infidel- says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 2:13 pm

      Yes. And migrants will Not work to support old white people, as they (migrants) would rather Kill the wise?old retirees. Bad Plan

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 10:11 pm

      +1

  6. Phil Copson says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:26 am

    “….First World countries should not hesitate to adopt pro-natalist policies of the kind now being tried, with success, in Hungary. In that country, newly-married couples are given an interest-free loan of $36,000 which is cancelled when they have their third child. A woman who has four or more children is then exempt from paying income tax for her entire life. Outright grants – not loans — are given to families for housing; the more children in the family, the greater the size of the grant…..”
    ————————————————————————————-
    In a country such as Hungary – with a very small immigrant population – this may work: But how do you apply it in a country that already has a large immigrant population ? How can any Western government ever introduce a policy with a “white people only” or “non-muslims only” caveat attached, without being hounded from office and being made forever unelectable ?

    Offering incentives to have more children is most likely to be taken up by those who are already in favour of having multiple wives, large numbers of children, replacing the indigenous population, and living on benefits.

    A alternative idea to accomplish the same end, would be to force house-prices down by preventing mortgage companies from taking both partners incomes into account when assessing loan applications, and also to reduce the multiples of the husbands income they lend against.

    The housing market is a sponge which absorbs whatever money is available: Allowing both partners incomes to be used when calculating a loan, simply drives house prices upwards so that it now needs two incomes to buy the same house that the husbands income alone would previously have bought.

    Reducing house prices will allow women who currently work just to help pay the monthly bills, to stay at home and raise families if they choose, without incentivising those who don’t work anyway.

  7. Walter Sieruk says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:38 am

    Regarding those Muslim migrants who were allowed to enter the different countries of Western Europe with result in them not only being ungrateful but even worse yet many of those Muslim migrants becoming so very arrogant to the point that they became criminals . As in some of them engaged in rioting and even rapes of the European girls and women. In addition to this vile brutal behavior by the heinous Muslim who were kindly permitted to enter the nations of Europe to live,

    As the countries of ,for example France, Germany Sweden, Denmark etc. This unthankful Islamic spirit on the part of those lawless violent Muslims who immigrated to the countries of Europe may be explain, in part, by the fact that the Muslim fundamentalist group that even had the president of Egypt assassinated in the month of October of the year 1981 has a fifty –five booklet that is was written only for Muslims fundamentalists but was later discover by non-Muslims.

    This booklet’s title is THE NEGLECTED DUTY. One scholar, Johannes Jansen who had thoroughly investigated Islam and Islamic terrorism has even discover that those Muslims, who had entered Europe of behaved in violent and heinous ways, are actually action out what they view and a sacred individual duty of the jihad as by engaging in awful violent criminal action in non-Muslim lands . As Jansen revealed that jihad booklet of Islam, THE NEGLECTED DUTY “contains all the ideological material needed to justify the attacks of 9/11 or any other acts of terror committed to frighten non-Muslims. And he thinks the document explains the criminal behavior of suburban and center –city immigrant youngsters in many European cities; its author clearly ‘sees Islam as license to kill rob and commit arson.’ “ [1]

    Nevertheless, many of the apologists for Islam still have that blatant gall , in spite of all the facts of reality, to actually make the claim the Islam is a “peaceful religion.” What a totally false to make that Islam is “a peaceful religion “What Bull! A “peaceful religion” indeed.

    [1] THE ISLAM IN ISLAMIC TERRORISM by Ibn Warraq pages 308, 309.

  8. George Parker says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:38 am

    Fertility is a measure of ones ability to conceive or to produce a viable zygote. Birth rate although related, is something entirely different. Lets be kind. Obviously the idiots being interviewed by the BBC have limited understanding; a globalist slant to their thinking and little national pride.
    The solution to falling native birth rate is government led incentives to breed. Rather than make children a financial and social burden, give tax incentives to families with young children. Prioritise state housing for married couples with children. Bring grandparents who aid in childcare into the system too. Let them claim some benefit or other. Everything to encourage the accepted christian type of family unit. With increased birth rate for native people.
    The above ideas are the result of less than five minutes thought by someone who has raised four children in a loving stable family home. Surely the Civil Servants being paid to advise government can do much better. IF THEY REALLY WANTED TO. Therein lies the problem.

    • craig says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 3:19 pm

      These incentives never work. And they have been tried in many countries. Russia, Japan, Hungary, Singapore, have all enacted pro natalist policies with little success. These range from tax incentives to outright cash payments for women to have more children. They don’t work. As long as the woman has a choice between education and working, or reproducing, she will choose the former over the latter. Personally I don’t see all the problems with western birth rates that so many people seem to get hysterical over. But if it is a solution that you’re seeking taking away the rights of women will increase birthrates. Make it so that they are dependent on a husband instead of the state.

  9. Walter Sieruk says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:40 am

    In the book written by the scholar and expert on subjects of Islam and Islamic terrorism , Robert Spencer, which has the title of THE HISTORY OF JIHAD FROM MUHAMMAD TO ISIS on pages 367, 368 it’s revealed that “The early twenty –first century saw a sharp rise in jihad massacres perpetrated all over the West by individuals or small groups of Muslims : in London ,Manchester , Paris, Toulouse, Nice, Amsterdam , Madrid, Brussels, Munich, Copenhagen Malmo, Stockholm, Turku [in Finland] ,Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Beslan ,among other places.”

    The jihadist or jihadists attacks in Western nations be the Muslim terrorists in the city of ,Strasbourg, Stockholm, London, Manchester ,Brussels , Paris, Nice, Berlin ,Madrid. Those jihad-minded Muslim terrorists who engage in those vicious Islamic terror attacks cannot be and will not be reasoned with. They will not respond to either logic or reason. They aren’t interested, at all, in reason or logic. So they have to be dealt with by a strong force of might; either by the police or the use of force by the military.
    As Thomas Jefferson had,so wisely written “With every barbarous people…force is law.”

  10. Walter Sieruk says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:42 am

    Those jihadists /Muslims with their insidious jihad-minded Muslims scheming for the subtle and not so subtle, Islamic conquest of Europe by every possible means, including the stealth and violent jihad which is, indeed, awful.

    As explained by William Wagner in his book HOW ISLAM PLANS TO CHANGE THE WORLD .Which informs the reader n page 195 “Of all the continents of the world, Europe is probably the number one target by Muslim strategist who are seeking world dominance.”
    Therefore, the Europeans would be wise to be on guard.

  11. Haroldp says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:43 am

    Europe is going down. Native Europeans aren’t having children. In order to keep their industries going, their leaders made a deal with the devil by accepting immigrants from Muslim countries who don’t share European values and don’t want to integrate, but rather to take over. There is already a breakdown of law and order as a result. Soon we will see the first oh-so-moderate Muslim prime ministers of Western European countries. After all, it would be islamophobic to vote against someone just because of their “religion.”

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 10:14 pm

      But most Muslims won’t work and prefer to live on the dole. Muslim immigration makes this worse.

      • Joss says

        Jul 24, 2020 at 8:34 am

        How very true, but out politicos refuse to accept that truth,

      • Jaydam says

        Jul 24, 2020 at 11:35 am

        +1

  12. Walter Sieruk says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 11:43 am

    This Quran quote by the Muslim clerics who lives in the United Kingdom should serve as reminder as well asa warning regarding many of those jihad-minded Muslim migrants who have entered European countries and then show only contempt .dishonor and reproach towards the people of those Western nations who were kind yet foolish enough to allow them, those Muslim migrants to enter, invade, their home countries of Europe in the first place. This type of situation is f reflected in the Bible .Which reads “When the wicked comes, contempt comes also; with dishonor comes reproach.” Proverbs 18:3. [N.K.J.V.]

    Those jihadist Muslims with their Islamic way of thinking by their well thought Islamic schemes for the action of involvement in their violent and sheath jihad for the advancement of Islam in the many different Western nations. Those sly scheming jihadists are, somewhat, of a reminder of the information reveled in the Bible in Proverbs 15:26. In which the reader is informed that even “The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the Lord…” [N.K.J.V.]

  13. revereridesagain says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 12:21 pm

    Here is a shocking notion: WOMEN ARE INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS. NO TWO ARE ALIKE. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONTROL OUR BODIES AND THE COURSE OF OUR LIVES. Nothing justifies “all women should be forced to have babies.” Yes it would be excellent policy to make it easier for women who do want children to have plenty of them, but how likely will that be should the Left get control? Also “if they can afford it she should have a baby every year” is utterly dismissive of the fact that some women aren’t suited for motherhood, and do you really want to force a lot of them to do it anyway even if you believe your god insists? And before you get your noses in the air please acknowledge that “give me your… wretched refuse” is a virtuously self-sacrificial Christian sentiment. Except that the current “huddled masses” frequently lack the accompanying virtues of many of the older models encouraged to thrive in greater freedom.

    On the other hand, solutions such as, a) making it easier for women who do want children to have and support them and b) accepting immigrants who are likely to thrive and contribute to the success of their adopted nation are eminently rational — and we all know the Left will continue to fight against them tooth and nail since neither is to their benefit. The common sense realization that unlimited “third world” migration will result in the dismantling and impoverishment of the Western nations is music to the ears of the woke SJW gated community set, not just the Antifa and BLM firebombers. Resistance to it is “raaaist”. No wonder they all hate Hungary so much.

    Meanwhile, look what they’ve done to the school system. How does a young woman who has been looking forward to having her first kids and sending them to school view that prospect today as opposed to 4 WHOLE MONTHS AGO? The Left is working on turning grade school into an outright disaster because COVID!!! and higher education is already a Marxist hellhole. Mulsims can’t be banned because a) Orange Man Bad and b) Islamophobia, so the MB’s plans to sabotage our “miserable house” proceed apace. (How does “US Attorney General Keith Ellison” sound to you?)

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 10:22 pm

      revereridesagain wrote:

      Here is a shocking notion: WOMEN ARE INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS.
      …………

      Hear, hear!

      • Jaydam says

        Jul 24, 2020 at 11:36 am

        +1

  14. European pagan says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 1:21 pm

    1. In Germany, most of the people live in rented flats, not in their own. This flats are very expensive and they want to see 1000 papers if you want to rent a flat. 1 flat – 300 people who want to rent it. Some people need months or years to find one. And I heard that they don’t like to give them to people who have children. Dog – yes, children – no.
    2. Do you have a dog? Pay tax. Do you have a TV? Pay tax. You DON’T have TV? No problem, you have to pay tax for the TV or you can go to the prison. And you need permission for everything but they never ask people, for example about mass migration.
    3. Homeschooling is forbidden. I heard about an 11 years old girl who committed suicide 1 or 2 years before, because of bullying.
    4. There are so many people who suffer from depression and burnout and mental problems, and I think it will be not better.
    5. There are countries where people make 10+ children, they don’t care that they don’t have enough money, food, the children can’t go to school, BUT for them family is more important. In Europe, there are people who wait that their parents die because they want the money. I know this kind of people 🙁

    I am a 30 years old European woman and I can understand if someone doesn’t want to have children. Maybe it’s better.

  15. Daniel Triplett says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 1:24 pm

    Excellent piece Hugh. So important.

    Projecting native populations is a rather simple math equation. At current birthrates, the native-European population 280 years from now in 2300 will be just 5% of what it is today. That’s right, a 95% decrease.

    Meanwhile, the African Muslim population is exploding, projected to increase from 1 Billion to 4 Billion in just the next 80 years alone. And they make no secret of their intentions: They’ll be leaving their mud huts in the third World to hijra to Europe for Allah. They know by doing so they won’t need to build anything, they’ll live much better lives, and they’ll simultaneously earn a ticket to Paradise from Allah for spreading his evil creed across the globe.

    This is a major league disaster of Biblical proportions we’re marching toward. Ignoring it won’t make it go away. The natives must grow, while Islam must end.

    Europe must remain free and non-Islamic. We can’t surrender it to Dar al-Islam, as we have and continue to do with much of the rest of the World. Our American grandfathers 80 years ago also rightly recognized the indispensability of a free Europe, and we spent a whole lot of blood and treasure to preserve it.

    Hugh has excellent ideas on how to fix the European population problem, primarily through pro-natalist policies for native procreation, then if necessary, supplemented by controlled immigration from Kafir states in SE Asia and S America.

    I just add that someday we must address the problem with Islam altogether. It’s a zero-sum conflict that will never end until the World is either 100% Islamic, or 0% Islamic, their rules, not ours. The Ummah refuses to coexist with the rest of us, and they refuse to stay in their own yard. Their deity requires them to come into our yards too and slaughter us if we don’t submit to Allah. So, we’re in a global war, whether or not we want it, and it’s never going to end until either the Ummah or Kafirs, one or the other, wins the entire planet. This is an unavoidable certainty. Delaying an offensive campaign only serves to make the campaign more costly, difficult, dangerous, and desperate.

    By what basis will Europe (or any Kafir state) prohibit Islamic migration? If there’s nothing criminal with Islam or Muslims, then why deny immigration? And if there is something criminal with Islam and Muslims, then how do we justify denying immigration, but allowing the Muslims already internal to our borders to continue practicing Islam and using dawah and womb jihad to expand Islam from within?

    Islam is a criminal enterprise. At minimum, it’s Conspiracy for Murder and Sedition, along with 100 other crimes that smart lawyers could prove. We’re not required to tolerate Islam or any other ideology or peoples who pursue our enslavement and extermination.

    The only objective that ends the war successfully for us is a World in which Islam is forcefully proscribed (criminalized) Worldwide. There are some practical ways to do that, but this post is already too long-winded, so I’ll save my thoughts on that for a different time.

    • Hugh Fitzgerald says

      Jul 23, 2020 at 3:07 pm

      Thank you, Mr. Triplett.

  16. Ray Jarman says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 1:32 pm

    The article mentioned the that countries like the UK would have such a small population by 2100 as if that would be detrimental to its economy. By 2100 most manufacturing will be performed in large part by robotics and for the service industry, the quick takeaway services such as Burger King and McDonalds are leading the way with the use of robotics. I am sure that the governments can create a tax scheme that would treat robotics tax payers. Besides, I would ask the BBC and any other advocators for Muslim Africans to replace their own societies, how has it worked out so far?

  17. janicevanguilder says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 3:11 pm

    The governments and the corporations seem to need their brains checked. If the goal is to bolster both corporate and national economies, then importing those with hostile, parasitic and ultimately non-productive intentions is obviously a major, serious mistake. If however they wish to exterminate that which put them where they are, via genocidal techniques, well then…

  18. Paul Stein says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 4:02 pm

    There are way way way too many people in the World already. They stretch limited resources and cause environmental destruction and global warming. Controlling populations is a good thing! Why bring in immigrants who will reverse the controlled populations? Any mismatch between numbers in generations are corrected in short time. As other people have mentioned, technology will replace many menial jobs by immigrants.

  19. Marttheman says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 4:25 pm

    Great, I can see that the writer of this article as well as many of the comment writers come with actual reasonable solutions rather than just griping about the problems. I hope that policy makers will read these comments and start to put some effective policies in place to stem the flux of unwanted immigrants into our beautiful Western world, or what is left of it. There is hope. Let’s keep up the good work.

  20. Peter35 says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 6:02 pm

    Considering many western countries are badly (some grossly) overpopulated, with associated problems concerning water, sewage, parking, congestion and dozens of other problems, one would think western countries could have been headed in the right direction, but no; the lunatics insist we need ever more people, plastic everywhere and problems galore–and they rule!

  21. J Morgan says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 9:32 pm

    In the USA we have encroaching Islam AND we have maybe 50 million illegal refugees. Most of them with the attitude of la Raza to take over America! Our nuclear family has made a white fight out of a California Sanctuary City and I have to admit we are happier and things are calmer and friendlier in a more rural area.

  22. gravenimage says

    Jul 23, 2020 at 10:01 pm

    With Declining Birth Rates, Is There Nothing For the First World But “Unlimited Mass Migration”?
    ……………….

    Of course not. Whatever problems we have now, they will not be improved by allowing violent Muslims who want to impose Shari’ah on us and live on the dole.

    • James Lincoln says

      Jul 24, 2020 at 7:17 am

      +1

    • Reziac says

      Jul 24, 2020 at 10:33 am

      “…and live on the dole.”

      You misspelled “jizya”.

      • gravenimage says

        Jul 25, 2020 at 1:36 am

        Yes, Reziac–this is how Muslims see it–as their due.

  23. Eleanor says

    Jul 24, 2020 at 1:26 am

    Europe including Great Britain, did amazingly well population-wise throughout the past centuries, without the help of mass migration. The world was a better place when native peoples of all countries stayed put in their own territories.

    • PaulH says

      Jul 24, 2020 at 5:30 am

      I’ll second that.

  24. Rob Roy says

    Jul 24, 2020 at 5:42 am

    Mass migration is the reason for birth decline of natives… cocooning-a social effect on people living under threat. By experience I myself try to go out as little as possible. Native europeans try to stay away from weekend parties and go out, if at all… on Thursday, but then stay at home on Friday, Saturday. The threat of rape, knife attacks or beatings is permanent. Cultural enrichment.

  25. Adams says

    Jul 24, 2020 at 7:35 am

    What about the 200K abortions a year in the UK?
    Stop that and get the babes adopted . We can solve this problem given the will from the scum in our Parliament .

  26. Reziac says

    Jul 24, 2020 at 10:32 am

    Do the math. These migrants are a net financial drain, not a means of propping up a declining tax base. The object of admitting migrants by the millions is to collapse Western economies, which have so far proven too resistant to socialist takeovers…. the fact that useful idiots have been convinced it’s the “humanitarian” thing to do notwithstanding.

    • gravenimage says

      Jul 25, 2020 at 1:37 am

      Spot on. These Muslim migrants are costing us a fortune, besides everything else.

  27. OLD GUY says

    Jul 24, 2020 at 11:25 am

    Close the borders these islamic people are not the solution, they will make our lives a living hell. Maybe our governments could take all the money we will have to spend on these immigrants and offer it to young families to have more children, and to mothers staying home and raising their children or offering free child care for working mothers and fathers.

    We the American tax payer have been sending humanitarian aid to these foreign countries for my entire 77 years of life and have gotten nothing but trouble and hate back from these people. Maybe we should try a different approach by letting these countries and their people work it out for themselves. According to the Muslim/islamic leadership they don’t need our help as they are superior to us and expect us to serve them.

    Charity should begin at home , lets help the needy in our neighborhoods first and make America a great place to live and WORK.

    • J Morgan says

      Jul 24, 2020 at 11:29 am

      +1

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian top dogs approve bill to end UN nuclear inspections, increase enrichment
  • Dude on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Mojdeh on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.