The white people from Europe and America will have to decide where they want to flee to escape the immigrants (notice the parallels between the Eurabia/Mexican Reconquista scares).
See white flight.
I doubt anyone would flee if governments remained stable and religious persecution wasn’t taking place. It seems it only takes a few radical to raise quite a ruckus. As long as the citizens still had respect for women rights and freedom to practice or not practice religion there would likely not be a problem. There is some question if this would be the case.
The white people from Europe and America will have to decide where they want to flee to escape the immigrants (notice the parallels between the Eurabia/Mexican Reconquista scares).
See white flight.
Ah well then if only you had said “If over the course of 40 years large numbers of countries in Europe will become unstable, mass acts of religious persectution will take place and women’s rights will be severly curtail.” that would at least be interesting.
Funny how when you say that and not “Muslim hordes will ruin Europe” you only sound paranoid instead of bigoted.
They tend to toss the word bigoted around here quite freely. Like a lot of other Americans I see what floats around on the media. I don’t believe everything I read but I also don’t ignore everything I see. Being aware or cautious of threats even if they are sometimes overblown is not bigoted. We only know what we see and are exposed to. Some big problems have happened throughout history by ignoring things that didn’t seem right.
But surely the question is presented in rather more acute form by the American Republican right than by European Islamists? The right in the US has already been influential in circumscribing womens’ rights to reproductive health and aims to do more of that, and the lunatics openly calling for, e.g. explicit religious discrimination in US immigration law and policy are a lot closer to power in the US than any Islamist is in Europe.
So I think it might be slightly more realistic to ask whether large numbers of Americans will flee to Europe in response to the impending destruction of their liberties. Objectively, it’s not realistic at all to ask that, but it’s much more realistic than the question you’re asking.
There’s some question over whether vaccinations cause autism too but that doesn’t mean we have to take them seriously.
How exactly are Muslims going to “raise a ruckus”? If they commit crimes, they’ll be arrested just like anyone else would be. But I’m even more curious how you imagine Muslims will “gain political control over most of western Europe”? If they try to enact a law to close churches or ban alcohol or make women wear hijabs, they’ll just get outvoted by the overwhelming majority of Europeans who aren’t Muslims.
People need to learn the difference between “I feel threatened by that person” and “that person is threatening me”.
Despite lots of propaganda, there is no evidence that Muslim populations will “take over” any Western European country anytime soon. Changing birthrates, immigration from Muslim vs. non-Muslim countries, conversion (in vs. out) rates, all work against the “Eurabia” idea. Furthermore, Muslims in European countries wield power disproportionately low compared to even their smaller population sizes, and this is also not likely to change anytime soon.
To be entirely fair, it’s not unheard of to convert to Islam; my half-Aunt did, and she was as ethnically British as they come.
In my local area, I believe Muslims are the largest single religious group. The closest thing to a problem this causes is that it can be a bit difficult to park on Islamic holy days, as there’s a mosque two streets away. The church opposite is actually worse for that though, as more of its viaitors come from out of area.
Oh, and as the three closest butchers are all run by Muslims, my housemate (I’m vegetarian) has to buy pork at the supermarket, or from the 4th closest butcher. Probably not really worth fleeing the country for.
You hear it threatened in the US whenever a Republican wins the presidency.
A little perspective:
Percentage of people living in the United Kingdom who are Muslims: 4.5%
Percentage of people living in Germany who are Muslims: 5.4%
Percentage of people living in France who are Muslims: 7.5%
Percentage of people living in Egypt who are Christians: 10%
But you don’t hear anyone talking about how soon the Christians will be taking over Egypt.
To be fair, most of those Christians aren’t immigrants to Egypt, which I think is the thrust of this argument - it’s not just that they’re Muslim - Europe already has one majority-Muslim country (or, at least, Muslims outnumber Christians) - it’s that they’re also Other.
Pchs. Some opt for “us Basque can be born wherever the fuck we want to and from whomever the fuck we want to”; we don’t stop being Basque, we just add more labels. “Where were you born” (Pamplona), “where are you from” (Pamplona), “where did you grow up” (Tudela), “where were your ancestors from” (Navarre, Guipúzcoa, la Behe, Asturias, León, Teruel, Catalonia, Italy and Lorraine among others), “what is your primary language” (Spanish, English and Catalan), “what identity label do you prefer for yourself” (Navarrese), “what nationality are you” (Spaniard)… are all different questions. The Catalanists pulled all of them into one, it worked well for them; the Basquists copied it, it backfired big time, we’re back to treating them as separate ideas. We’re back to where you can be Habibi called Javi, from Morocco, Muslim, primary languages French and Arabic, and be Basque. And if your wife wants to call the baby Arantxa then by Jaungoikoa your baby will be called Arantxa.
Well, yes. But, of course, they only way they’ll ever get to be a majority - if they ever do - is by ceasing to be Other. Where Islam has become a majority outside Arab land it has been by gaining converts, and for Europe to become Muslim-majority by immigration requires something north of 700 million Muslim immigrants. That ain’t gonna happen.
In the event of a general election Christians will vote across the spectrum of parties standing. the danger here is that the Islamic community will vote for the Muslim candidates, take into consideration a very lack lustre (30%) none Muslim turn out against a high (80%) Muslim turn out and the figures could be well truly skewered and countries that have a postal vote system have a problem as Tower Hamlets (UK) has proved.
You forget that most of Europe has considerable more sophisticated voting systems than the US, incorporating proportional representation and preferential voting. Vote-splitting between parties doesn’t result in the bizarre distortions that would result under the American system. The Muslim population in the EU is 6%, projected to rise to 8% by 2030. Even if they had a 100% turnout, and even if the whole EU were saddled with the cruddy first-past-the-post system that prevails in the US, and even if they all vote for just one party, that’s not going to get them a majority, or anything like it.
Where is this lunatic scaremongering coming from?
I mentioned Tower Hamlets U.K because of a proven court case where the postal vote was used to successfully gain a Asian leadership there are several suspected election frauds due to the postal vote that are under scrutiny. Other areas to watch out for are school governors boards, there have been attempts to have a Islamic influence in state schools in Birmingham U.K
My deepest apologies for not fully grasping your strongly held unfair view of an entire group based solely on their religion. Since that can’t possibly be bigotry I suppose we’ll have to settle for ignorance.
Why not try to recast your OP in specific language instead of broadly painted fevered imagining?
I live in Tower Hamlets. There were and are already Muslim candidates and councillors in other parties. One individual with a fanclub in the Labour Party took umbrage at not being offered the leadership, stood as an independent with his own party and engaged in clientelistic (in the circumstances one can hardly call it pork-barrel) politics, but his supporters were not universally Muslim, and Muslims were much in evidence among his opponents. This was not a straight Asian vs. European or Muslims vs. the rest divide, nor were his politics in practice particularly favourable to Muslim ideas and practices, as distinct from favouritism towards his friends.
And in both this and the Birmingham case, existing regulatory systems sorted out the problem.
This is all just henny-penny scaremongering on a faulty understanding of current statistics, past history and fundamental human nature. The apocalypse is not going to happen.
I agree the apocalypse is not going to happen. I hear on the grape vine that the postal vote in the U.K is going to revert back its original form only for people cannot get out to vote through health reasons or out of the country.
Scaremongering is a little strong I think one of the advantages of these boards is the exchange of information and idea’s