Based on current trends, Africa as a whole is projected to double in [population] size by 2050. Between 2050 and 2100, according to the United Nations, it could almost double again.
Once the migrant taxi serviceis stopped in the Mediterranean, the UN, the EU and African leaders better get to work on the African continent and stop being too chicken to address the population growth there.
By the way, the same goes for the US. Encouraging the flow of refugees from Africa to your US towns does nothing to help Africa get their population under control.
“Who would have guessed that a constellation of formerly atheistic, Communist countries would become the vanguard of the family?”
(Samuel Hammond writing at National Review)
It isn’t just in Hungary either. In Poland and especially in Russia the push is on to encourage marriage and then the all important follow-up—more babies!
Why? They want to produce their own replacements and stop the flood of third world migrant workers that globalist corporations say are needed to keep the economy humming. Never mind that the migrants have no interest in maintaining Hungarian, Polish or Russian culture (even if they work and don’t depend on welfare payments).
I guess you can tell, I love this guy—Viktor Orban—because he has no fear of telling the truth.
And, this subject interests me because in the 1970’s I was steeped in this idea that no family should have more than two children in order to save the planet. But, guess what, only white educated young people listened.
And, in fact, no one I ever knew made any serious effort to tell it to those in the Middle East and Africa especially where Muslims were pushing their people to produce babies for Allah and to migrate.
Here is a detailed account at National Review of what, first Hungary is doing to boost its population, and what is happening in Russia and Poland to do the same.
It strikes me that a renewed focus on American family-building might be something Donald Trump should incorporate into his campaign message.
Birth dearth: Millennials’ rejection of parenthood could be lethal blow to Western civilization
Here are just a few snips to whet your appetite, but please read it all and then send it to everyone you know!
America has entered a demographic winter that should make every patriotic citizen shiver with concerns for their children’s future.
That is, if they have any children.
It’s a problem you won’t hear much about in the media but it’s been brewing for years.For many feminists, to even talk about it is tantamount to the unforgivable sin.
But all denials aside, this problem is as plain as the nose on little Johnnie’s face: The birth rate in these United States of America is imploding.
We are now in the same range as the European death spiral.
The fertility rate now stands at 1.7 births per woman. For a generation of Americans to replace itself, it takes a fertility rate of at least 2.1 children per woman.
The U.S. was, until a few years ago, among a handful of developed countries that could muster the pivotal 2.1 threshold.
A 39-year-old Christian woman who has worked in Germany’s migrant camps for years told The Express that Christians in those camps are harassed and intimidated. They thought she was a Muslim, so they confided in her.
“Some women told me, ‘We will multiply our numbers. We must have more children than the Christians because it’s the only way we can destroy them here.’”
U.S. Muslims have repeatedly boasted of the same strategy.
Read it alland send it out far and wide (especially to your young friends)!
Wouldn’t you love to see a campaign from the White House to encourage Americans to have babies!
It is funny, of all the things I have said here in nearly 11 years, when I urge young patriots to have more babies it sets the Libs hair on fire!
The ‘WE’ of course being the great planners and social engineers of the universe, including the environmentalists and the human rights gang (the UN surely).
In a recent article in Nature, the authors say the world’s population will grow by 1 billion by 2030 and they are plotting where would it be best for the earthto put that next billion (if they were granted permission I suppose to move people around the globe—but wait! Isn’t that what the UN is already doing without permission?).
No surprise! Most of the population that will expand is in Africa and Asia so those people would presumably need to be moved.
Academics Richard T.T. Forman and Jinguo Wu mapped out areas around the world where these additional people could live most sustainably.
[They] ruled out regions with already dense populations as well as areas with high water stress, extreme climates and unique species.
In Nature, the two professors called for ‘worldwide coordination’ to promote a balanced population in a way that would minimize the ‘already heavy ecological footprint on our finite Earth’.
So check it out. Do you live in a population dump target zone? Yellow! And, to a lesser degree blue!
Sure looks like the excess population of the Middle East/North Africa would be moved elsewhere. Did you ever wonder why there is complete silence on the subject of excessive population growth in Muslim countries?
UN family planning for Muslims!
No, you know the answer, these population police are afraid to tell Muslims that they need to stick to 2 children per family to save the planet! Ha! Ha! I would love to see the new Secretary General of the UN—Antonio Guterres—take on that project (UN family planning for Muslims!). Hey, if we send so much money to the UN maybe a Trump administration could demand that such a program be launched!
Although we haven’t said much about it lately, you might be interested in our ‘Climate refugees’ category because although I’m not a big conspiracy hunter it doesn’t take much to figure out that the great minds and social engineers are busy getting all this in place. Maybe the Refugee Program is part of the overall plan to soften us up for kill.
“The cumulative effect of immigration from religious countries, and religious fertility will be to reverse the secularization process in the West. Not only will the religious eventually triumph over the non-religious, but it is those who are the most extreme in their beliefs who have the largest families.”
As we have often argued on these pages—demography is it—change the people in order to change the future of nations (ours being of particular concern to me!).
We know that some demographers have argued that fecund people—like Muslims and Hispanics—reduce the number of children they have as they become more prosperous and live in first world countries, but this London demographer (raised in Canada) doesn’t see that—even if reduced slightly, the birthrate of religious people still outpaces the secularists.
Read this fascinating analysis of London Professor Kaufmann’s work at the Vancouver Sun where the photo above catches one’s eye for sure!
Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and other well-known atheists consider the decline of religion inevitable as the global population becomes more secular, more educated and more urban.
Last month, a Pew Research poll in the U.S., the world’s most-religious industrialized nation, revealed that three out of four Americans also agree religion appears to be in retreat.
But is it? While secularists are making some inroads in North America and Europe, the new atheists and others are missing a crucial demographic shift as the world’s population has swelled to seven billion.
Those who believe the world is inexorably becoming more secular are overlooking the rise in the developing world of Muslims, Hindus, Catholics and Pentecostals, as well as the phenomenally rapid expansion of sects such as the Amish and ultra-Orthodox Jews.
In a challenge to the secularizing proposition, Eric Kaufmann, a noted London-based demographer, projects that religious people, especially conservatives, will win the race against the non-religious in the 21st century.
Why? Basically because religious women are having far more babies than secular women.
Read on. There is a lot more. By the way, I’m afraid that all those non-Muslim religious people (noted by the Professor) combined will not out produce Muslims since their numbers are so much greater to begin with! I guess Professor Kaufmann isn’t going to tell us that.
The Vancouver Sun directs us to an older story about how immigrants high birthrates affect Canadian taxpayers, here.
In the middle of a piece by Patrick Buchanan yesterday, here at World Net Daily. He gives a brief timeline that you need to know when someone in your community tries to shut you up with that tired old declaration that “we are a nation of immigrants,” and therefore we are expected to take in the world forever.
Below is Buchanan after explaining that our founders were all of similar background, religion, culture and language.
Later, in our history we abruptly slowed immigration for 40 years because we were overloaded (graph at right shows the dramatic slowdown).
We were not a nation of immigrants in 1789.
They came later. From 1845-1849, the Irish fleeing the famine. From 1890-1920, the Germans. Then the Italians, Poles, Jews and other Eastern Europeans. Then, immigration was suspended in 1924.
From 1925 to 1965, the children and grandchildren of those immigrants were assimilated, Americanized. In strong public schools, they were taught our language, literature and history, and celebrated our holidays and heroes. We endured together through the Depression and sacrificed together in World War II and the Cold War.
By 1960, we had become truly one nation and one people.
Along comes Senator Ted (don’t bring any to Hyannis) Kennedy:
Here we are again today flooded with millions of migrants who are not assimilating, will have little chance of assimilating even if they want to (are they going to assimilate when resettled into ghetto hell holes?), and others who have no plans to become Americans in any sense of the word.
But, they, impoverished masses, are not to blame for why we are no longer one Nation, one people, as Buchanan says. The blame falls directly on the “progressives” and one-worlders who are tearing down America’s gates (and the gates of every first-world country), for what? Do they really think a glorious one-world utopia awaits? Or, do they just want every country leveled to third-world squalor status.
Invitation to tell us what you want!
Over the years I have asked critics of this blog to write a guest post that explains to us what they want, do they want a borderless America? If not, how many people do they want to let in? Tell us how and when they would stop the flow. Then tell us where the millions who would come here from every corner of the world would work and how they would all be fed and housed. I especially would like to hear from an avowed environmentalist who is also an advocate for more immigration. And, the guest writer must write the piece without any emotional guilt-driven “nation of immigrants” B.S.