Is Europe doomed?

[revots33]

I consider myself politically liberal but recently decided to read the book "America Alone" by Steyn because I thought it looked interesting.

Steyn paints a very bleak picture of the future of the European continent. His basic thesis is that Europe will be a Muslim continent before too long. This is based primarily on demographics... native Europeans are not having nearly enough children to replace their populations (some like Spain and Italy are basically halving their populations with each generation), while Muslim immigrants are arriving in great numbers and having many children. He also points out the impossibility of sustaining the social welfare programs Europeans love without children to pay taxes and fund all this cradle-to-the-grave security. In other words, he thinks Europeans are so complacent that they have no interest in doing anything to avert the looming economic/social catastrophe.

Anyway, I'm no expert in this but it certainly made me depressed for the future of Europe and the western world. Then I hear about Muslim riots in Paris and Muslim violence in Malmo and it seems like the fall of Europe is already happening.

Be interested to hear thoughts from anyone else who's read the book or from Europeans who see the problems first-hand.

[iron81]

I haven't read the book, but I think I see a flaw in the Author's logic:

[ QUOTE ]
Muslim immigrants are arriving in great numbers and having many children. He also points out the impossibility of sustaining the social welfare programs Europeans love without children to pay taxes and fund all this cradle-to-the-grave security.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TomCollins]

In the future, when there are no more white people, who will the problems of the world be blamed on? The asians better watch out.

[revots33]

I probably didn't do a very good job of presenting the author's argument. I think he was using the social welfare programs more as an example of Europe's "let the government do everything for me", complacent mentality. This type of complacency is why they ignore the even more pressing demographic time bomb - they are too busy living it up on the gov't dime to bother with things like having kids.

Again, I'm sure someone else who read the book (if anyone did) could sum it up better than I.

While the book had a smartass tone, I felt the statistics he presented were quite compelling.

[Jamougha]

[ QUOTE ]
]I think he was using the social welfare programs more as an example of Europe's "let the government do everything for me", complacent mentality.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a badly thought-out comment. At least, I hope it is.

[ QUOTE ]
This type of complacency is why they ignore the even more pressing demographic time bomb - they are too busy living it up on the gov't dime to bother with things like having kids.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason people are not having as many children is that many women have entered the workplace and are unwilling to give up work for family. One of the few places without an imploding population is Denmark, where they have long maternity leave and universal, free day-care for children.

[slickpoppa]

The problem I have with this book is not its observations about demographics and welfare states, but its implicit conclusion that the US should unabashedly spread its system a la the War in Iraq.

I love how conservative decry the unintended consequences of government intervention at home, but think those rules go out the window with respect to foreign policy.

[DVO]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem I have with this book is not its observations about demographics and welfare states, but its implicit conclusion that the US should unabashedly spread its system a la the War in Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

Steyn says no such thing.

BTW he does use a picturesque phrase to describe what is happening in Europe:

"Hollowed out from within."

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem I have with this book is not its observations about demographics and welfare states, but its implicit conclusion that the US should unabashedly spread its system a la the War in Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

Steyn says no such thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he does. Pgs 168-69:

[ QUOTE ]
In the wake of September 11, the administration pledged itself to a long-overdue reversal of decades of misguided foreign policy that the Second Inaugural made explicit: Bush committed America to spreading freedom through the Muslim world....
Almost as soon as American troops entered Iraq, Senate Democrats demanded to know what the "exit strategy" was. "Exit strategy" is a phrase that might have been designed as a textbook definition of a lack of will. In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat. The latter's easier. Just say, whoe, we're the world's dominant power but we can't handle an unprecedently low level of casualties, so if you don't mind we'd just as soon get off at the next stop....
For a serious power, the correct answer to "What's the exit strategy?" is there isn't one, and there shouldn't be one, and it's a dumb expression. The more polite response came in the president's second inaugural speech: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands."

[/ QUOTE ]

Steyn was a staunch supporter of the war in Iraq and just seems like an idiot in general:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steyn
Detractors claim [8] that Steyn disregards opposing arguments and events that contradict his earlier predictions. These include his repeated claims that Osama Bin Laden was "certainly" dead. His incorrect predictions have been widely mocked. For example, Geoffrey Wheatcroft in the Guardian wrote,:

"Apart from predicting that George Bush would win the 2000 presidential election in a landslide, Steyn said at regular intervals that Osama bin Laden "will remain dead". Weeks after the invasion of Iraq he assured his readers that there would be "no widespread resentment at or resistance of the western military presence"; in December 2003 he wrote that "another six weeks of insurgency sounds about right, after which it will peter out"; and the following March he insisted that: "I don't think it's possible for anyone who looks at Iraq honestly to see it as anything other than a success story."

[Msgr. Martinez]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem I have with this book is not its observations about demographics and welfare states, but its implicit conclusion that the US should unabashedly spread its system a la the War in Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

Steyn says no such thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he does. Pgs 168-69:

[ QUOTE ]
In the wake of September 11, the administration pledged itself to a long-overdue reversal of decades of misguided foreign policy that the Second Inaugural made explicit: Bush committed America to spreading freedom through the Muslim world....
Almost as soon as American troops entered Iraq, Senate Democrats demanded to know what the "exit strategy" was. "Exit strategy" is a phrase that might have been designed as a textbook definition of a lack of will. In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat. The latter's easier. Just say, whoe, we're the world's dominant power but we can't handle an unprecedently low level of casualties, so if you don't mind we'd just as soon get off at the next stop....
For a serious power, the correct answer to "What's the exit strategy?" is there isn't one, and there shouldn't be one, and it's a dumb expression. The more polite response came in the president's second inaugural speech: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands."

[/ QUOTE ]

Steyn was a staunch supporter of the war in Iraq and just seems like an idiot in general:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steyn
Detractors claim [8] that Steyn disregards opposing arguments and events that contradict his earlier predictions. These include his repeated claims that Osama Bin Laden was "certainly" dead. His incorrect predictions have been widely mocked. For example, Geoffrey Wheatcroft in the Guardian wrote,:

"Apart from predicting that George Bush would win the 2000 presidential election in a landslide, Steyn said at regular intervals that Osama bin Laden "will remain dead". Weeks after the invasion of Iraq he assured his readers that there would be "no widespread resentment at or resistance of the western military presence"; in December 2003 he wrote that "another six weeks of insurgency sounds about right, after which it will peter out"; and the following March he insisted that: "I don't think it's possible for anyone who looks at Iraq honestly to see it as anything other than a success story."

[/ QUOTE ]

How anyone could mistake this partisan hackery for a logically-sound argument is beyond me.