If Mort Divine ruled the world

[Dak]

That's the problem. I was, the writer of the article was and basically anyone who talks about refugees are referring to Syrians. I have not heard one peep about the Algerians, the Morrocans or the Iranians coming to Europe. Nope, it's those Syrians.

Well that's on them, and they are certainly part of the problem, just not the only country generating refugees.

A 100 years is an incredibly long time in modern history. Don't even know what you're talking about.

If you mean a lot can happen in 100 years, that's true, and that's support for what can happen demographically. Generations are ~20 years, so that's 5 birth/die off phases. But in terms of even merely written human history, not much time at all.

 

[CiG]

You're throwing out context though, for example even historically, 100 years is a long time in certain civilisations but not so much in others. 100 years is spit in a bucket for indigenous Australians pre-colonisation but a long time in any context for unstable regions or the Mongolians or even The Ottoman Empire.

 

[Dak]

You're throwing out context though, for example even historically, 100 years is a long time in certain civilisations but not so much in others. 100 years is spit in a bucket for indigenous Australians pre-colonisation but a long time in any context for unstable regions or the Mongolians or even The Ottoman Empire.

I'm thinking globally. Obviously time is compressing the further we move forward.

 

[Matt]

You haven't provided an argument or data for me to respond to. Ad homs and unsupported assertions about what will or won't happen in the future aren't going to cut it.


Maybe the problem is that Muslim majorities wouldn't occur in your lifetime, so you don't give a shit/can't think past the next meal.

Yeah I just start these things and completely lose interest halfway through. I don't have any facts to back my claim up because it's probably not quantifiable and your article proves absolutely nothing besides what was already common knowledge. I believe heavily Islamic areas will grow rapidly, yes, but Western regions aren't just going to acquiesce to that kind of society. They hate Muslims enough already.

 

[Dak]

I believe heavily Islamic areas will grow rapidly, yes, but Western regions aren't just going to acquiesce to that kind of society. They hate Muslims enough already.

The only way you don't acquiesce to a majority is to not have democracy.

 

[Omni]

The United States is safe then.

 

[SentinelSlain]

I don't think there's going to be some kind turning point where Europeans start sticking up for their own culture. I think it's just going to get worse and worse until it's over and we're forced to live under dhimmitude, under much harshness and unable to defend ourselves in any way. The main reason behind all of this seems to be baby boomers being massive idiots.

 

[Matt]

The only way you don't acquiesce to a majority is to not have democracy.

They won't allow a Muslim majority in the first place. They have extremely tight immigration caps.

 

[rms]

I don't think there's going to be some kind turning point where Europeans start sticking up for their own culture. I think it's just going to get worse and worse until it's over and we're forced to live under dhimmitude, under much harshness and unable to defend ourselves in any way. The main reason behind all of this seems to be baby boomers being massive idiots.

I think this is really wrong. Conservatives in every country are big on 'white' culture, and it's growing due to the actions/depictions of (Syrian) refugees. France is a big example. Isn't Sweden seeing a growing 'nationalistic' movement as well?

 

[Dak]

They won't allow a Muslim majority in the first place. They have extremely tight immigration caps.

Do they have conversion and fertility caps?

 

[rms]

It's called being affluent. Affluent people don't have babies. #RememberYourDemographicInfo

 

[Dak]

It's called being affluent. Affluent people don't have babies. #RememberYourDemographicInfo

So you would just assume affluence for so many? I wouldn't. "Inequality" and corruption is a huge problem in Islamic-run countries. They also don't need to have tons of babies, just more than those around them. I'll take the religious vs the atomistic nihilist when betting on procreation every time, affluence levels be damned.

 

[rms]

Poverty in America is likely better than the status of most in the Middle East or Northern Africa. EU is even more of a "gimmedat" society. Middle Easterners have no problem becoming materialists and capitalists, so why not adapt that lifestyle too?

And we have that nice poor white population that likes to have a plethora of babies. The conviction of your argument on such a small piece of evidence is mind blowing, quite honestly. I thought it was just the Hitler thing, but this may be a reoccurring thing for ya man..

 

[Matt]

Do they have conversion and fertility caps?

Are non-religious whites converting to Islam at a high rate? Do western countries that are either Christian or Atheistic have large amounts of people converting to Islam?

 

[viewerfromnihil]

And, to add to your point, are most children of Muslim immigrants becoming extremists? If the history of the United States gives any perspective, just give it a few generations before the Northern Africa and Middle East get scrubbed from them.

 

[CiG]

They won't allow a Muslim majority in the first place. They have extremely tight immigration caps.

This ignores conversion rates.

And, to add to your point, are most children of Muslim immigrants becoming extremists? If the history of the United States gives any perspective, just give it a few generations before the Northern Africa and Middle East get scrubbed from them.

How do you define extremist? Polls would suggest that the average moderate Muslim agrees with many elements of their religion that we would consider extreme.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Sure. And a lot of Christians in this country believe crazy things too: see Trump popularity. But the concerted crazy things, like the holocaust, only happen when there is an organized political force that is willing to act on its extreme views. Unfortunately, this is a thing that truly can occur, but it only occurs when the existing government doesn't deal with the problem in a spectral manner--see the Weimar Republic.

 

[CiG]

Nice deflection.

 

[Dak]

I like how all the evidence I've provided is "small" (and it was only a tip of the iceberg of demographic stuff), and you guys are dismissing it with a grand total of zip other than doing the "look around" test and goin "Nope, don't see any Sharia here", as if we are talking about something that would happen now, or tomorrow, or even twenty years from now.

Obviously a ton of different things could happen in a time-span like 100 years or more that that could change trajectories, like war, resource shortages, etc. That's not being debated. But, what's under contention is pretty clear cut: Islam is growing biologically and through conversion. Europe and the US are graying. Europe and the US also have also been stripped to some degree of defense against aggressive behavior because of SJW bs (like neighbors not reporting the Cali bombers, UK keeping all the rapes hush hush, Germany trying to keep a lid on the NYE stuff, etc), and against conversion because of atheism. If policy, fertility, and religiousity continue to go as they currently are, at some point in a future (very likely past our lifetimes), the Muslim population would reach the critical mass necessary to make various countries Islamic by default, and other places create a voting/political bloc powerful enough to push various things through. If you think some of those trends will not continue, how about which one(s) and why/how (with some actual support), rather than going "lulz build a bunker bro". Or simply don't say anything at all.

 

[CiG]

Christianity is projected to decrease, Islam projected to increase, lesser religions projected to mostly remain constant, atheists/non-religious overwhelmingly don't breed children. Do the math.