Western Democracies and Islamic Demographics

[Walker in Eternity]

The idea for this thread came out of a suggestion in this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=520410) thread about the BNP.

The BNP and other ultra nationalistic parties in Europe would claim that unless action is taken a European Islamic state is innevitable. This seems in part to be based upon the ideas by Bernard Lewis a professor of islamic history at Princeton.

I quote:

Bernard Lewis, a leading authority on Islamic history, suggested in 2004 that the combination of low European birthrates and increasing Muslim immigration means that by this century’s end, Europe will be “part of the Arabic west, of the Maghreb.” If non-Muslims then flee Europe, as Middle East specialist Daniel Pipes predicted in The New York Sun, “grand cathedrals will appear as vestiges of a prior civilization—at least until a Saudi-style regime transforms them into mosques or a Taliban-like regime blows them up.”

This (http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=wq.essay&essay_id=519403) article, where I obtained the quote from, seems to dispute this stance and even suggests that birth rates in the majority of islamic countries are declining.

The birthrates of Muslim women in Europe—and around the world—have been falling significantly for some time. Data on birthrates among different religious groups in Europe are scarce, but they point in a clear direction. Between 1990 and 2005, for example, the fertility rate in the Netherlands for Moroccan-born women fell from 4.9 to 2.9, and for Turkish-born women from 3.2 to 1.9. In 1970, Turkish-born women in Germany had on average two children more than German-born women. By 1996, the difference had fallen to one child, and it has now dropped to half that number.

Obviously predicting the future accurately is very difficult, but what do you thik are the likely outcomes and what will be the effect on western style democracy?

I have a few possibilities, in no particular order:

1. Muslims become the largest demographic group in Europe, but things carry on pretty much the same but with a more religious flavour.

2. As above but Sharia law dominates and forced conversion is carried out, either openly or by the back door.

3. The far right will rise to power before this happens and will forcibly expel muslims from Europe.

4. Variations in birthrates mean the outcome is uncertain, but overall, Europe remains secular and tolerates the diversity of its inhabitants.

5. Other?

Personally I hope for number 4, but would like to hear what others think about this contentious issue.

[Švejk]

I'd say option four is likely. First of all, the percentage of Muslims is likely to go up in the coming years in a bunch of countries as a result of immigration and a higher (if only slightly so) birthrate. However, the percentual differences between the Muslim and non-Muslim populations is so huge that it'll take forever in order for Muslims to become the largest group. In the Netherlands, for instance, it is said that there's 1 million muslims, as opposed to 15 million non-muslims. At that ratio, it'll take so much time for Muslims to become the majority that it's probably worthless to even speculate.

This is where another consideration enters into play, which is the question 'who are the Muslims'. The 1 million that is regularly quoted for the Netherlands is a total WAG: no one really knows who are Muslims. We have a fairly good idea (but still not great) who are from countries that are considered Muslim countries (which is a wildly varying bunch, ranging from Pakistan and Bangladesh to Indonesia, from Turkey to Morocco and, in the case of the Netherlands, to a group of people hailing from Surinam in South America!), and who their children are, and who their grand-children are. But we don't know if those people consider themselves Muslim at all, and if they do, what exactly it is they believe. It is a pretty wild assumption to believe (as you will have to if you're going to go with option 2, for instance), that all of them are Muslims (and orthodox ones at that, in both belief system and actual behavior) and that this will continue to be the case for future generations.

[ITR champion]

Yeah, I'm constantly amazed by how many people seem to think that being Muslim is an inherited trait. It's highly unlikely that all the descendants of immigrants from Muslim countries will remain Muslim.

As for demographics I'm not worried. The last time I checked, the total Muslim population was about 8% in France and not more than 4% in any other European country. That was some years ago and the answers may be higher now, but not by very much. At earlier times in history, Americans worried that their nation was doomed to be taken over by the Irish or the Italians or the Japanese. It didn't happen. Things change.

[Simplicio]

At earlier times in history, Americans worried that their nation was doomed to be taken over by the Irish or the Italians or the Japanese. It didn't happen. Things change.

Well, it sort of did. An Irish Catholic got elected President, and the Papists are some 25% of the population now. It just didn't turn out to be that big of a deal.

I suspect the same thing will happen in Europe, their numbers will increase (though they won't get close to being a majority, as their birthrate continues to shrink) but they'll be more or less assimilated into the general European Population. Which isn't to say that many of them won't continue to be Muslims, they'll just be Westernized Muslims. The authors talk of a European Taliban taking over is silly.

[chappachula]

1. Muslims become the largest demographic group in Europe, but things carry on pretty much the same but with a more religious flavour.

4. Europe remains secular and tolerates the diversity of its inhabitants.


there's another option, which combines 1. and 4. :
Muslims become a very large demographic group adding a religious flavour, but Europe does not tolerate the diversity of its inhabitants.

Europe could become a place where ethnic identity struggles keep society in a constant state of tension, resulting in civil war (like Lebanon), or requiring military rule to prevent civil war (like Turkey) . The recent Serbian/Albanian war should serve as a warning.

[TheMightyAtlas]

Yeah, I'm constantly amazed by how many people seem to think that being Muslim is an inherited trait.


It is very close to that under Islamic law. Children are assumed to have the religion of their father. Muslim women are not allowed to marry non Muslims. And renouncing Islam is punishable by death. From my personal experience with Muslim families I know living in the US and UK (I am a non-Muslim, originally from Pakistan) there is a very real physical danger from immediate and extended family if you violate any of these laws. It is by no means 100%, but definitely more common than you would like to believe.

Of course there are penalties in the West for killing your apostate wife or daughter, but it is only so much of a deterrent for someone who believes they are doing God's work, or for whom controlling their family is the end all and be all of existence.

[athelas]

The big question is whether the Muslims assimilate. If they do, then we're no worse off than the US and Irish immigration: some growing pains with lawlessness and crime but no long-run problems. If they do not, as seems to be the case in, for example, the French banlieus, then we have a bigger problem. People seem to be very good at assuming that one or the other will be the case, but they are less good at giving reasons why they will or will not resist assimilation - they tend to revert to ideology not facts.

[Bryan Ekers]

Clearly we need to speed development of corrosive secular influences like ultraporn.

[tomndebb]

Well, it sort of did. An Irish Catholic got elected President, and the Papists are some 25% of the population now. Backwards.

Kennedy was elected at a time when active Catholics probably made up a bit less than 20% of the population while another 5% or so were "cultural" Catholics. Now the total number has fallen to around 22%, (although it has been picking up slightly with immigration from Central America), and the active number has fallen further.

= = =

As to the OP, my recollection of the "Muslim" youth riots in France a couple of years back is that the Imams, (and, often, the parents). in the Muslim immigrant ghetttoes constantly expressed regret that the hoodlum kids were not practicing Muslims. They had all become secularized to French patterns of behavior and tended to wave the banner of Islam only to rile up the people they felt were oppressing them because the purported oppressors called them Muslims.

Lewis is an excellent scholar of ancient history, but nearly all his modern predictions have failed to come true.
Pipes is just a hater of Islam whose dream seems to be to establish a corresponding institution to the Moody Bible Institute to attack the horror of Islam instead of the Whore of Rome.

[Walker in Eternity]

The big question is whether the Muslims assimilate. If they do, then we're no worse off than the US and Irish immigration: some growing pains with lawlessness and crime but no long-run problems. If they do not, as seems to be the case in, for example, the French banlieus, then we have a bigger problem. People seem to be very good at assuming that one or the other will be the case, but they are less good at giving reasons why they will or will not resist assimilation - they tend to revert to ideology not facts.

I'm not sure of the answer to that question, are there any statistics that back up the argument either way?

My personal feeling is that many muslim communities ghettoise (sp.?) more than other asian groups, such as hindus, and that this slows but does not completely halt integration into the rest of society.

[even sven]

It is very close to that under Islamic law. Children are assumed to have the religion of their father. Muslim women are not allowed to marry non Muslims. And renouncing Islam is punishable by death. From my personal experience with Muslim families I know living in the US and UK (I am a non-Muslim, originally from Pakistan) there is a very real physical danger from immediate and extended family if you violate any of these laws. It is by no means 100%, but definitely more common than you would like to believe.

If the only reason you don't renounce Islam is fear of retribution from your family, presumably you wouldn't continue that by threatening your own children.

[Der Trihs]

As to the OP, my recollection of the "Muslim" youth riots in France a couple of years back is that the Imams, (and, often, the parents). in the Muslim immigrant ghetttoes constantly expressed regret that the hoodlum kids were not practicing Muslims. They had all become secularized to French patterns of behavior and tended to wave the banner of Islam only to rile up the people they felt were oppressing them because the purported oppressors called them Muslims.That's how I recall it as well; they were Muslim in name only.

[Freddy the Pig]

People seem to be very good at assuming that one or the other will be the case, but they are less good at giving reasons why they will or will not resist assimilation - they tend to revert to ideology not facts.The Open Society Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Society_Institute), which promotes democracy and civil society. studied questions relating to Islamic assimilation in the Netherlands in Muslims in the EU: Cities Report, the Netherlands (http://www.eumap.org/topics/minority/reports/eumuslims/background_reports/download/netherlands/netherlands.pdf) (pdf).

Muslims make up about 6% of the population in the Netherlands. They live almost exclusively in four major cities--Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht, and the Hague, in which they make up about 15% of the population. The percentage of people under age 20 is twice as high among non-natives as among native Dutch, so about 30% of the under-20 population in these major cities is Islamic, and even assuming converging birth rates and no further immigration the overall percentage of Muslims in the cities will rise to that level as older generations of Dutch die off.

With respect to identity, the OSI found:The Social and Cultural Planning Office (SCP) produced an important recent report, Muslims in the Netherlands, on Muslim identity and religious perception. This study concluded that only 3 per cent of the Moroccans and only 5 per cent of the Turks in the Netherlands see themselves as non-religious. By contrast, only 35 per cent of (native Dutch) consider themselves as belonging to a religion. For most Turks and Moroccans Islam is of significant personal importance. . . . In addition to an ethnic-religious identity, for many Turks and Moroccans, their ethnic-national identity is important. Interestingly, among young Moroccans, their ethnic-religious identity is significantly stronger than their ethnic-national identity; in other words they identify more with being a Muslim than with being a Moroccan. In contrast with the first generation, the second generation experiences a decrease of the ethnic-national bond with Morocco. However, the ethnic-religious identity of Turks and Moroccans is strikingly stable across the generations: both the first and the second generation strongly identify with Islam. A marriage with an Islamic partner is still considered very important.With respect to assimilation: The spatial segregation of sections of the population coheres with limited social interaction. 70 per cent of the Turks and 60 per cent of the Moroccans associate predominantly withmembers of their own ethnic group. Two thirds of the native population have little or no contact at all with immigrants. The contacts in leisure time between Turks and Moroccans and the native Dutch have declined in the last ten years. Notably, Turks and Moroccans of the second generation have associated less with the native Dutch in latter years.

[kanicbird]

5. Other?

Is my vote. I saw statistics about the birth rate of Christians (about 1.6-1.8 children per couple) and Muslims (about 6-8 children per couple) in the countries you speak of. The thought came to me how easy it would be for God to put a new testament into the Koran (either directly, or revealing what is already there or converting them, or whatever way He wants.), to free the Muslims by the blood of Jesus. The following verses came to me:


As he says in Hosea: "I will call them 'my people' who are not my people; and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one,"


And do not think you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.


Along with the very first instruction God gave mankind:
28a God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number;
And the very first instruction that God gave Noah after the agreement of peace was made between God and man:
Genesis 9:1
Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, " Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth"

It is very evident that being fruitful and increasing in number for us is very important to God and IMHO is His (to use a star trek term) prime directive for humanity. It also appears that violation of this causes all sorts of trouble for us in scriptures.

With God on His throne looking down at us, looking at birth rates of 1.8 vs 6 children per couple, it doesn't seem that unlikely that He may reveal Himself to the Muslim people very soon.

[athelas]

Not totally on topic, but this (http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13782527) Economist article describes some interesting immigration research:Even after controlling for income, education and other relevant economic and social factors such as work history and age, views about redistribution in an immigrant’s home country are a strong predictor of his own opinions. Indeed, this measure of “cultural background” explains as much as income levels, and three-fifths as much as income and education combined. These results hold even for immigrants who moved 20 years before they were surveyed; they cannot be attributed to people not having had time to adjust their views.

Even more convincing evidence of the impact of culture comes from second-generation immigrants. The opinions of children born in the host country about the desirability of redistribution are strongly influenced by the norms that prevail in the countries their parents came from.This puts libertarians in the awkward position of supporting free immigration even as it may permanently decrease public support for libertarian policies.

[Spectre of Pithecanthropus]

I'd say assimilation is the key. I heard a report on NPR recently about the differences between Muslims in the United States vis-a-vis their counterparts in the British Isles and Continental Europe. In general they are much better assimilated here, although some may object that it is at the expense of their devotion to faith. They are much more likely to be professional or independent proprietors, and to have been such before they immigrated. Notwithstanding a considerable degree of assimilation, they generally find significant expat communities in which they can feel "at home away from home". This seems to extend generally to Middle Eastern immigrants of other faiths as well, e.g. Iranian Jews.

I'm not sure how it can be done, but I think France and the UK need to achieve this. From what I've seen of Germany it seems to be less of a problem there. The Turks have been there so long already, they mostly speak German reasonably well, and there has been a strong secularist trend in Turkey since the days of Ataturk. One can reasonably expect that the imported Turkish culture would influence that of later immigrants from other Muslim countries.

ETA having lived for 12 years in a large apartment house filled almost entirely with Iranian Jews, I will say that in the one respect of learning English they seem slow to assimilate, although, as we find throughout history, that is less true of the younger generation.

[Walker in Eternity]

It is very evident that being fruitful and increasing in number for us is very important to God and IMHO is His (to use a star trek term) prime directive for humanity. It also appears that violation of this causes all sorts of trouble for us in scriptures.

With God on His throne looking down at us, looking at birth rates of 1.8 vs 6 children per couple, it doesn't seem that unlikely that He may reveal Himself to the Muslim people very soon.

Being fruitful and multiplying, whatever your faith, is the problem. There are just too many people and not enough resources, Maybe your "god" likes us to suffer?