Europe submits voluntarily

[Jokodo]

Since you don't think islamization is bad, I would not trust your "checking".

You don't have to trust me - I posted the raw numbers, feel free to do the calculations yourself1

But even if you are right about TFR, the fact remains that Islamic percentage in Western Europe is steadily increasing. That means that islamization is inevitable unless Europe wakes up and quick.

It doesn't mean any such thing.

Define quickly? You must mean "slowly", as in 2-3 generations. And in the meantime their numbers increase precipitously.

Not confirmed by reality.
You don't happen to be a creationist, do you? Because your arguing tactic is pretty much the same: Make some claim that can either easily be demonstrated to be false or is plain irrelevant, never acknowledge when it's defeated and silently move on to the next claim, and each time make some logical leaps to arrive at your desired conclusion.

That TFR is "much more related to the local economy and culture than to religion" is exactly the point I'm trying to make, and which angelo and others are denying.

But religion is part of culture. Sure, in Africa TFRs are high for Muslims and Christians alike, but they are higher for Muslims.

They're higher in Muslim-dominated parts of the continent, but mostly due to two factors: geography and colonial history. As I said before, in West Africa Muslims tend to live further inland than Christians, that alone is a big factor in economical development and consequently fertility. Plus, the Christian colonial powers tended to neglect the Muslim areas of their colonies more. Pew itself says so in pretty much every article about Africa.

In Myanmar, the Rohingya Muslims have ridiculously high birth rates and girls start having children by 14 or even earlier. In fact, in almost every region Muslims have higher TFR than non-Muslims.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-10...ms-really-threaten-myanmars-buddhist-identity
Do you ever fact-check before making a claim?

The only exception is Middle East and North Africa, but there are few non-Muslims there anyway.
So don't tell me TFRs do not depend on religion.

Such a comparison of raw numbers is basically worthless when it doesn't look at factors like the ones I mentioned.

In fact, I'm willing to argue that economy is the only biggie of these two (another one is educational standards: many Eastern European countries, whether or not they have high numbers of Muslims, have low TFRs, and lower ones than expected from their GDP alone; they also have higher educational standards than expected from their GDP alone, and pretty much all countries where TFR doesn't follow the GDP correlation in the other direction have undeserved income).

Correlation does not mean causation. In fact, causation could go the other way or both could be caused by the same variable. E.g., Islamic cultural norms can be causing high both TFRs and a crappy economy.

If that where the case, how do you explain Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Brunei, Malaysia, Lebanon, and Turkey (a probably incomplete list of Muslim majority countries with TFRs below the replacement level)?

Especially, who do you explain Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE? I believe we both know that they became rich by mere luck (and thus I won't argue with you if you say undeservedly), and as a consequence, TFRs fell. They didn't shed their "Islamic cultural norms" in an intermediate step, did they?

Reality strikes again!

If we did allow religion as a major factor, we'd come to the conclusion that if anything, it's judaism, not islam, that's most strongly connected with high TFRs.

According to CIA World Factbook, Israel has TFR of 2.64 (including Israeli Arabs), West Bank (presumably including settlers) 3.27 and Gaza Strip (which has no Israeli settlers and hardly any non-Muslims of any kind) 4.13. The most purely Muslim region also has significantly higher TFR.

I saw that. I don't know where the CIA gets its figures for Israel from, though. Israeli government agencies cite as well as the World Bank give a figure of 3.1. I'd rather trust the Israeli government on this one.

 

[Hermit]

1870s American bathing suit for women.

The bikini wasn't invented until the 1940s.

Meaning what? Had someone worn a bikini at a public bath or the beach in the 1870, they would not have been arrested? Dream on.

20 years after the invention of the bikini the beach inspectors at Bondi were still escorting women wearing them off the beach for being too scantily clad. Another 20 years later again women wearing nothing but a g string caused no official action. That is precisely my point. Mores change.

 

[TSwizzle]

The bikini wasn't invented until the 1940s.

Meaning what?

Meaning, what the fuck did you expect women to wear at the beach in 1870 ?

 

[Jokodo]

Since you don't think islamization is bad, I would not trust your "checking".
But even if you are right about TFR, the fact remains that Islamic percentage in Western Europe is steadily increasing. That means that islamization is inevitable unless Europe wakes up and quick.


Define quickly? You must mean "slowly", as in 2-3 generations. And in the meantime their numbers increase precipitously. Note also that Muslim mass migration is not a finite pulse. It's not something that happened in 2015 and is now over. No, mass migration of Muslims is ongoing and will continue as long as Europe doesn't close their borders to illegal migration by refusing to feed and house illegal migrants. Berlusconi has the right idea.

That TFR is "much more related to the local economy and culture than to religion" is exactly the point I'm trying to make, and which angelo and others are denying.

But religion is part of culture. Sure, in Africa TFRs are high for Muslims and Christians alike, but they are higher for Muslims. In Myanmar, the Rohingya Muslims have ridiculously high birth rates and girls start having children by 14 or even earlier. In fact, in almost every region Muslims have higher TFR than non-Muslims.

The only exception is Middle East and North Africa, but there are few non-Muslims there anyway.
So don't tell me TFRs do not depend on religion.

In fact, I'm willing to argue that economy is the only biggie of these two (another one is educational standards: many Eastern European countries, whether or not they have high numbers of Muslims, have low TFRs, and lower ones than expected from their GDP alone; they also have higher educational standards than expected from their GDP alone, and pretty much all countries where TFR doesn't follow the GDP correlation in the other direction have undeserved income).

Correlation does not mean causation. In fact, causation could go the other way or both could be caused by the same variable. E.g., Islamic cultural norms can be causing high both TFRs and a crappy economy.

If we did allow religion as a major factor, we'd come to the conclusion that if anything, it's judaism, not islam, that's most strongly connected with high TFRs.

According to CIA World Factbook, Israel has TFR of 2.64 (including Israeli Arabs), West Bank (presumably including settlers) 3.27 and Gaza Strip (which has no Israeli settlers and hardly any non-Muslims of any kind) 4.13. The most purely Muslim region also has significantly higher TFR.

Israel's data does not include Gaza,

Which is at 4.13.

and it does not include West Bank Arabs (who incidentally have a lower TFR than Israel).

How do you figure that?

West Bank settlers > (but almost equal) Gaza strip > Israel proper > West Bank Arabs.

Citation needed for this bold, and almost certainly bogus, ranking.

btw, yes, my statement was bogus: The West Bank settlers' TFR isn't almost equal to the Gaza strip's, it's significantly higher. Israel proper however has a rate closer to the West Bank's than I expected. So what we get is:

Negev Bedouins > West Bank Jewish settlers > Gaza strip >> Arabs (-Bedouins) in Israel proper > West bank Arabs ~ Jews in Israel proper.

Again, economics and education win against religion, and if religion is supposed to be a factor, its again Judaism driving up the rate: Settlers aren't all that poor, and Israeli Jews are certainly richer than West Bank Arabs.

 

[Jokodo]

The bikini wasn't invented until the 1940s.

Meaning what?

Meaning, what the fuck did you expect women to wear at the beach in 1870 ?

I'm pretty sure underwear was invented well before the 1940s.

Women in 1870 could have worn underwear at the beach, right?

Wrong, they'd have been dragged away by police for indecent exposure.

 

[Derec]

Meaning, what the fuck did you expect women to wear at the beach in 1870 ?

I'm pretty sure underwear was invented well before the 1940s.

Women in 1870 could have worn underwear at the beach, right?

Wrong, they'd have been dragged away by police for indecent exposure.

So we have experienced a development toward more personal freedom. Under Islam women are often forced to cover up, even having to wear "burqinis" to the beach. So islamization would mean a regression toward what US was like 150 years ago, and very probably far beyond that point.
Are you finally understanding why some of as are not as sanguine as you seem to be at the prospect of Islam becoming majority anywhere in the West?

 

[angelo]

There's abundance evidence available that " muzzies" do not assimilate very well into Western democracies!

Yeah. Right. Just like the two million overwhelmingly Muslim guest workers from Turkey in Germany did not.

That's absurd. A Pew research found that over 60% [ a conservative figure] of those 2 million muslims in Germany and elsewhere in Western Europe consider themselves to be Muslims before Germans.

 

[angelo]

There's abundance evidence available that " muzzies" do not assimilate very well into Western democracies!

And yet you seem oddly incapable of presenting any. Every single testable claim you have made in this thread so far has been shown to be false; Most are (like the above) simply bald assertions, and as such valueless.

How are the western suburbs of Sydney going? Are they integrated yet?

 

[Jokodo]

Meaning, what the fuck did you expect women to wear at the beach in 1870 ?

I'm pretty sure underwear was invented well before the 1940s.

Women in 1870 could have worn underwear at the beach, right?

Wrong, they'd have been dragged away by police for indecent exposure.

So we have experienced a development toward more personal freedom. Under Islam women are often forced to cover up, even having to wear "burqinis" to the beach. So islamization would mean a regression toward what US was like 150 years ago, and very probably far beyond that point.

That's what you're claiming, but you're failing to provide a single coherent argument that this is indeed so.

 

[Derec]

That's what you're claiming, but you're failing to provide a single coherent argument that this is indeed so.

Have you looked at countries dominated by Islam? Vast majority of them are shitholes with very regressive laws and mores.

 

[Jokodo]

That's what you're claiming, but you're failing to provide a single coherent argument that this is indeed so.

Have you looked at countries dominated by Islam? Vast majority of them are shitholes with very regressive laws and mores.

As were a vast majority of Catholic countries 100 or 150 years ago. It didn't lead to America becoming such because of Catholic immigration!
Actual historical experience shows us that "a regression toward what US was like 150 years ago, and very probably far beyond that point" is an unlikely consequence of migration. And yet you prefer to ignore the evidence and keep going on about how this obviously has to be so because it seemed logical in your head.

 

[LordKiran]

That's what you're claiming, but you're failing to provide a single coherent argument that this is indeed so.

Have you looked at countries dominated by Islam? Vast majority of them are shitholes with very regressive laws and mores.

As were a vast majority of Catholic countries 100 or 150 years ago. It didn't lead to America becoming such because of Catholic immigration!
Actual historical experience shows us that "a regression toward what US was like 150 years ago, and very probably far beyond that point" is an unlikely consequence of migration. And yet you prefer to ignore the evidence and keep going on about how this obviously has to be so because it seemed logical in your head.

Also they didn't just become shitholes because "Teh Izlam!" These things happened for a reason for which The US and GB are ultimately complicit and now we get to live with the consequences as do many people who actually live there.

Really if you need someone to blame, I would just as soon blame Eisenhower for setting the ball rolling post-WW2, and then after that comes the people who proceeded him, and then the people who proceeded them, onward unto the modern day. But then I guess that doesn't fit into a nifty hashtag so who cares?!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Immigrants, at the moment they arrive, tend to have TFRs similar to where they came from, but that difference quickly dissipates.

Define "quickly". My understanding is that it's a slow process and it takes a lifetime to match the TFR of the destination.

What do you mean by "a lifetime"?

Typical human lifespan. I don't know what the shape of the curve is within that range, though.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you rank the subpopulations of Israel/Palestine by TFR, what you get is approximately this: West Bank settlers > (but almost equal) Gaza strip > Israel proper > West Bank Arabs.

Wolfram Alpha has a problem with that.

Israel | 3.03 children per female (2013 estimate)
Gaza Strip | 5.03 children per female (2009 estimate)
West Bank | 3.22 children per female (2009 estimate)

 

[Hermit]

The bikini wasn't invented until the 1940s.

Meaning what?

Meaning, what the fuck did you expect women to wear at the beach in 1870 ?

Had someone worn a bikini at a public bath or the beach in the 1870, they would not have been arrested? Dream on.

20 years after the invention of the bikini the beach inspectors at Bondi were still escorting women wearing them off the beach for being too scantily clad. Another 20 years later again women wearing nothing but a g string caused no official action. That is precisely my point. Mores change.

 

[Hermit]

There's abundance evidence available that " muzzies" do not assimilate very well into Western democracies!

Yeah. Right. Just like the two million overwhelmingly Muslim guest workers from Turkey in Germany did not.

That's absurd. A Pew research found that over 60% [ a conservative figure] of those 2 million muslims in Germany and elsewhere in Western Europe consider themselves to be Muslims before Germans.

Link, please. I could not find that claim being made here, here or here.

 

[Jokodo]

If you rank the subpopulations of Israel/Palestine by TFR, what you get is approximately this: West Bank settlers > (but almost equal) Gaza strip > Israel proper > West Bank Arabs.

Wolfram Alpha has a problem with that.

Israel | 3.03 children per female (2013 estimate)
Gaza Strip | 5.03 children per female (2009 estimate)
West Bank | 3.22 children per female (2009 estimate)

The 3.xx figure for the West Bank includes Jewish settlers at 15-17% of the population and with a TFR of over 5 (and, unlike Gaza, rising).

If you do the math, you'll find West Bank non-settlers have a lower rate than Israel.

(Israel's figure may also include the settlers (but not the Arabs in the West Bank) because that's what Israel does, so they're counted twice; but given the much larger population of Israel, the effect of removing them is much smaller there.)

 

[TSwizzle]

Had someone worn a bikini at a public bath or the beach in the 1870, they would not have been arrested? Dream on..

Not possible. As I pointed out earlier, the bikini had not been invented. Fashions change. Now we have the thing bikini swimwear.

 

[LordKiran]

Had someone worn a bikini at a public bath or the beach in the 1870, they would not have been arrested? Dream on..

Not possible. As I pointed out earlier, the bikini had not been invented. Fashions change. Now we have the thing bikini swimwear.

If it's natural for fashions to change then why the big hubbub about changing fashion trends in Europe being informed by foreign cultures? What, do you all think cultural change just happens in a vacuum? Cultures inform eachother, cross polinate. Just as you can watch Friends and eat KFC in Kyoto, so can you find Japanese media and food in the USA. It's a two-way street you see.

Also the fact that "The bikini hadn't been invented yet" is entirely missing the point. Had it been it would have not been allowed and its creater would likely had been considered a national pariah (In France)

 

[TSwizzle]

If it's natural for fashions to change then why the big hubbub about changing fashion trends in Europe being informed by foreign cultures?

Hubbub ? There's no hubbub