Global Multiculturalism, Immigration, And International Population Demographic Changes - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Modern liberalism. Civil rights and liberties, State responsibility to the people (welfare).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14792982
In the west indigenous and domestic ethnic populations are on the rise to become the new population minorities. This is a very interesting historical development as global multicultural enthusiasts pride themselves on diversity, so what happens when this global multicultural diversity movement ( and experiment) going into the future sees entire ethnicities, cultures, languages, and national identities go extinct preceded first with population loss due to balkanization? That would imply some sort of ideological and practical failure due to shortsightedness, doesn't it? Nobody seriously understanding demographics denies these current future trends.

Will neoliberals admit that their ideology was flawed from the get go or will they just chock it up to the failure of the west to adapt to the new global multicultural movement of immigration and diversity?

Somehow I imagine a future neoliberal historian saying, "Global multiculturalism, immigration, and diversity didn't fail western civilization, it was the west that failed to adapt to it therefore it's not our fault as we're blameless." "We didn't cause the death of western civilization from the ruins which we inherited and currently live in."


Image

Image
#14793222
Joka wrote:In the west indigenous and domestic ethnic populations are on the rise to become the new population minorities. ... entire ethnicities, cultures, languages, and national identities go extinct preceded first with population loss due to balkanization?

You appear to be talking about 2 different phenomena which are the opposite of each other. If there is a country in which you expect the indigenous population to become a minority (as opposed to the ones where that happened a long time ago, such as native Americans in the USA, or Aborigines in Australia), then say which they are. But if you expect balkanisation, then that will be the formation of smaller units in some of which they will remain the majority, and there won't be 'extinction' of the ethnicities. You also ought to state where you expect this balkanization (and no, any break-up of the EU wouldn't count) to happen, and why.
#14793228
I can think of a few possible factors.

1) In 2014 27% of all live births in this country were born to non-U.K mothers.

That figure has also been increasing, but may be partially checked due to the OSBORNE budget measures due to come into force next month.

2)The effects of New Labour's brainwashing in our education system relating to 'sex' education in schools, this means that, in effect migrant births in this country have supplanted 'indigenous' births & thus the indigenous-migrant birth ratio has changed to upward of 4 to 1> in favour of migrant births.

That is to say that, there are 4 migrant births to every 1 'indigenous' birth & increasing.

The long term effects of the above, combined with higher death rates of the indigenous population, will see even greater effects on the population balance between indigenous & migrant people.

3) The birth rates of the British population have been falling since the 70's,much of which, is attributable to the economic situation prevailing since then, but which is possibly at a turning point.

4)There are many negative aspects to the welfare changes coming into effect next month, which will have a significant effect on the desire of couples to reproduce, even 'migrant' ones .

There is nothing wrong when population balances change 'naturally', it's when the effects of socio-political engineering is the driver of such changes, the effects are seriously disruptive, particularly in the acceptance of such change & there will be serious counter- effects politically to this.
Last edited by Nonsense on 03 Apr 2017 21:21, edited 1 time in total.
#14793230
Prosthetic Conscience wrote:You appear to be talking about 2 different phenomena which are the opposite of each other. If there is a country in which you expect the indigenous population to become a minority (as opposed to the ones where that happened a long time ago, such as native Americans in the USA, or Aborigines in Australia), then say which they are. But if you expect balkanisation, then that will be the formation of smaller units in some of which they will remain the majority, and there won't be 'extinction' of the ethnicities. You also ought to state where you expect this balkanization (and no, any break-up of the EU wouldn't count) to happen, and why.


I'm talking about primarily European caucasians although such a process certainly isn't limited to European caucasians as this process of historical balkanization of majority populations transforming to minorities isn't limited to them throughout global history. Native Americans and Australian aborigines are obvious good examples.

Still, concerning the United States, Canada, and Australia Europeans formed those nation states concerning government or national borders historically where I am primarily focusing on them. We can talk about non-European caucasians of course for the sake of greater conversational clarity as that in no way diminishes the argument of the discussion here.

I would argue balkanization is the main population choking point or bottleneck that inevitably leads majority populations demographically to become minorities. It isn't exclusive at all or something that is separate.
Last edited by Joka on 03 Apr 2017 21:19, edited 1 time in total.
#14793244
Nonsense wrote:I can think of a few possible factors.

1) In 2014 27% of all live births in this country were born to non-U.K mothers.

This looks to be a real fact - good. For 2015 it was 27.5% in England and Wales: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... rn-mothers

2)The effects of New Labour's brainwashing in our education system relating to 'sex' education in schools, this means that, in effect migrant births in this country have supplanted 'indigenous' births & thus the indigenous-migrant birth ratio has changed to upward of 4 to 1> in favour of migrant births.

That is to say that, there are 4 migrant births to every 1 'indigenous' birth & increasing.

This appears to be completely wrong. We've seen the 27.5% figure for non-UK born mothers. So, let's look at the proportion of the population around child-bearing age. You can get age and country-of-birth figures for the 2011 census here: https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011/dc2109ewr

Add up the figures for those who who be in their main child-bearing years in 2015 (say 16 to 39 in 2011), and you find around 20% were born outside the UK. So, 20% of the population have 27.5% of the births, and 80% have 72.5% of the births. Rather than a ratio of "4 to 1", that's a ratio of 1.5 to 1. "4 to 1" always looked a ridiculously high figure, and now we know it was. Where on earth did you find it? It's nonsense.

The long term effects of the above, combined with higher death rates of the indigenous population

Where does that come from? It sounds unlikely - immigrants tend to be poorer, and thus less healthy on average.

There is nothing wrong when population balances change 'naturally', it's when the effects of socio-political engineering is the driver of such changes, the effects are seriously disruptive, particularly in the acceptance of such change & there will be serious counter- effects politically to this.

Oh dear, so often these claims come down to ideas of a shadowy conspiracy to engineer something or other that is bad for the group the paranoid guy belongs to.
#14793255
Pants-of-dog wrote:Was there supposed to be a link with that post?

Edit: I see you have edited your post to add a link.

The link does not say that British people will be a minority in the UK for the foreseeable future.



Of course it doesn't, it's a statistical trend with a realistic prospect of becoming a reality, just watch this space.
#14793266
Add up the figures for those who who be in their main child-bearing years in 2015 (say 16 to 39 in 2011), and you find around 20% were born outside the UK.

The figures I quoted WERE(stating the obvious)of 'child-bearing' age.. duh!

It's no good quoting census data, it's even more dodgy than raw data that's been 'treated' by the O.N.S that comes from 'real' statistical data.


By Prosthetic Conscience -  03 Apr 2017, 21:35


The long term effects of the above, combined with higher death rates of the indigenous population

Where does that come from? It sounds unlikely - immigrants tend to be poorer, and thus less healthy on average.


Why does that sound 'unlikely'?

Out of any live population, that proportion of which is the largest would naturally have the largest number of deaths over any given time, the indigenous people, who currently are the largest proportion, particularly of elder people, will have the higher rate of deaths over any given period.

That will, in time, be eclipsed, if the replacement rate is lesser over the same period.

FYI, I am not 'paranoid'.
#14793267
The most recent official data shows some 3.3 per cent of live births in the UK were born to Polish mothers in 2015 - up from 2.3 per cent in 2008.

The number of babies born to Polish mothers overtook those from Pakistan in 2009, and reached 22,900 in 2015.

69,100 babies were born to mothers from the EU in 2015 - the fastest growing group. Some 52,900 babies were born to mothers from EU countries in 2010.

Meanwhile, since 2010, there has been a fall in the number of babies born to mothers from the Middle East, Africa and Asia - from a total of 106,200 in 2010 to 99,700 in the last year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08 ... nt-pledge/


Of the 20% figure, 40% were born to mothers from the EU and 60% were born to mothers from the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Polish mothers are more fertile than any other ethnic groups and there has been a fall in the number of babies born to non-EU mothers.

#14793277
United States-

Hey, they even have a preparation video also!

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, white people have another 30 years to enjoy being America’s majority race. But come 2045, the white population will make up less than 50 percent of the American population for the first time ever.

So what’s a privileged white person to do? Luckily for Caucasians everywhere, “The HuffPost Show” put together a helpful guide to ease the white transition into life as a minority.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/so- ... bb92325daf

I'm sure ethnic European whites becoming a population minority in the United States will make a smooth transition where there won't be any kind of retaliatory revenge politics, right? No, that could never happen....






The nation’s demographics are on a clear trajectory: White people are dying faster than they are being born, which means they are on target to become a minority in the United States in 30 years.

For the third year in a row, deaths of non-Hispanic whites outnumbered births, according to detailed population estimates for states and counties released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

“This is without historical precedent,” said Kenneth Johnson, the senior demographer at the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy. “The minority population is growing, and the non-Hispanic white population is not.”

Whites currently account for 62 percent of the population but 78 percent of deaths, according to Johnson’s analysis.

Their median age — half are older and half younger — has hit an all-time high of 43, said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution. For the first time, whites are in the minority among children under the age of 5.

“Since 2010, the overall under age 20 population is declining, while working ages and especially seniors are growing,” Frey said.

White populations under 20 declined in 46 states — in all but Hawaii, Utah, South Dakota, North Dakota and the District of Columbia.


http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2 ... ority.html
Last edited by Joka on 03 Apr 2017 23:24, edited 2 times in total.
#14793281
Pants-of-dog wrote:Okay, but that is not due to migration.

You claimed that modern migration patterns were unsustainable. This is neither. Also, you claimed it was Europe as well.


Still editing post, patience grasshopper.
#14793283
Joka wrote:In the west indigenous and domestic ethnic populations are on the rise to become the new population minorities. This is a very interesting historical development as global multicultural enthusiasts pride themselves on diversity, so what happens when this global multicultural diversity movement ( and experiment) going into the future sees entire ethnicities, cultures, languages, and national identities go extinct preceded first with population loss due to balkanization? That would imply some sort of ideological and practical failure due to shortsightedness, doesn't it? Nobody seriously understanding demographics denies these current future trends.

Will neoliberals admit that their ideology was flawed from the get go or will they just chock it up to the failure of the west to adapt to the new global multicultural movement of immigration and diversity?

Somehow I imagine a future neoliberal historian saying, "Global multiculturalism, immigration, and diversity didn't fail western civilization, it was the west that failed to adapt to it therefore it's not our fault as we're blameless." "We didn't cause the death of western civilization from the ruins which we inherited and currently live in."


This is the most important issue when it comes to immigration. It has nothing to do with compatible values or discussions of which populations are suitable for life in Western countries. The real main issue is the potential for demographic shift.

Unfortunately both the right and left misunderstand these developments because everything is shaped around the basis of cultural compatiblity. In reality it is not an issue of compatible or incompatible cultures but clashing ethno-religious interests which arise out of multi-ethnic societies.

The failure of advocates for mass immigration to recognise that balkanisation will be the inevitable result of these policies cannot be afforded any intellectual respect at all. In fact their denial of this obvious reality is so glaringly ludicrous that we should not dignify it with any response.

If pointing out this effective reality is racism then we have a massive problem. Ultimately the refusal to have a rational discussion about this question has very real consequences for European societies and future generations. If by 2075 France has a population that is 40 percent Algerian Muslim, 50 percent French Roman Catholic and 10 percent other nationalities, the country will be unable to function. Identifying this is not racism, because no blame is being placed on any particular ethno-religious group. This is an issue of demography and planning.

Malaysia, Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Pakistan and India are all examples of the inherent problems with multicultural societies.
Last edited by Political Interest on 03 Apr 2017 23:29, edited 1 time in total.
#14793284
Pants-of-dog wrote:Was the edit where you added the part where you voiced your fears about how blacks and Hispanics will treat white people?

It is a common fear among white people that they will be treated the same way white people have treated other races.


Revenge politics isn't limited to Europeans interacting with non-Europeans. Can be found all throughout the world through history. Doesn't take much to put all of that together.

Also, why do I get the feeling you glorify all of that with some sort of exemplary indignation?

Political Interest: This is the most important issue when it comes to immigration. It has nothing to do with compatible values or discussions of which populations are suitable for life in Western countries. The real main issue is the potential for demographic shift.

Unfortunately both the right and left misunderstand these developments because everything is shaped around the basis of cultural compatiblity. In reality it is not an issue of compatible or incompatible cultures but clashing ethno-religious interests which arise out of multi-ethnic societies.

The failure of advocates for mass immigration to recognise that balkanisation will be the inevitable result of these policies cannot be afforded any intellectual respect at all. In fact their denial of this obvious reality is so glaringly ludicrous that we should not dignify it with any response.

If pointing out this effective reality is racism then we have a massive problem. Ultimately the refusal to have a rational discussion about this question has very real consequences for European societies and future generations. If by 2075 France has a population that is 40 percent Algerian Muslim, 50 percent French Roman Catholic and 10 percent other nationalities, the country will be unable to function. Identifying this is not racism, because no blame is being placed on any particular ethno-religious group. This is an issue of demography and planning.

Malaysia, Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Pakistan and India are all examples of the inherent problems with multicultural societies.


I think the plan all along is to make all nations indistinguishable from each other in terms of race, ethnicity, identity, culture, language, custom, religion, and so on in that when the day arrives for absolute power consolidation of the entire planet takes place the abolition of independent nation states will be all that much easier to initiate or contain. Globalization and unlimited global immigration is a precursor to an eventual centralized one world government super structure where people can cry conspiracy theorist all they want which in no way diminishes that statement or argument. This I think is the global end game hypothesizing something of a global game theory.
Last edited by Joka on 03 Apr 2017 23:45, edited 3 times in total.
#14793286
Joka wrote:Revenge politics isn't limited to Europeans interacting with non-Europeans. Can be found all throughout the world through history. Doesn't take much to put all of that together.


This is another unsupported claim that I will address later.

Right now, you need to present evidence for your claim that modern immigration patterns are such that Europe and the US will be more than 50% minorities in the foreseeable future due to said immigration.

You said you would present this evidence, and you have not. Instead you presented evidence that the US will be less than 50% white in the future, which is not the same claim.

Also, why do I get the feeling you glorify all of that with some sort of exemplary indignation?


I have no idea. Perhaps you like investing others with odd emotional reactions to distract from the paucity of your argument. Now, can you please provide the evidence that I have asked for?
#14793292
Pants-of-dog wrote:This is another unsupported claim that I will address later.

Right now, you need to present evidence for your claim that modern immigration patterns are such that Europe and the US will be more than 50% minorities in the foreseeable future due to said immigration.

You said you would present this evidence, and you have not. Instead you presented evidence that the US will be less than 50% white in the future, which is not the same claim.



I have no idea. Perhaps you like investing others with odd emotional reactions to distract from the paucity of your argument. Now, can you please provide the evidence that I have asked for?


For the United States yes as I've only gone through information regarding it. As you may know there are a lot of western nations to go through concerning data, information, and trends. A long list of other nations we have to go through also. No, I'm almost certain you were getting excited at the prospects of revenge politics directed against a newly created white population minority. Call it intuition on my part, you were salivating over the thought of it, weren't you?

Also, less than 50% is a trend or pattern that most likely is irreversible meaning overtime that number will increasingly likely shrink more and more. You're not great with this whole foresight and long term thinking stuff, are you? It really does show. 50% easily turns into 30% and so on.

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has estimated that 11.4 million illegal immigrants lived in the United States in January 2012. According to DHS estimates, "the number of illegal immigrants peaked around 12 million in 2007 and has gradually declined to closer to 11 million."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_i ... ted_States

Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status Fiscal Years
2000–09

1,030,000

2010–15

1,032,400


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrati ... ted_States
Last edited by Joka on 04 Apr 2017 00:10, edited 1 time in total.

A few quotes from your article that you conveni[…]

What do you know about the effect of this on chil[…]

@Sivad Do you have an argument?

EU-BREXIT

Two interesting articles: https://www.theguardian[…]