Europe’s changing demographics
Astounding facts can be found here about the demographic transformation of Western Europe. An excerpt:
Between 2010 and today, in only 16 years, the number of foreign-born residents in Europe rocketed from 40million to more than 64million. In other words, Europe’s ruling class added 24million foreign-born residents in only 16 years, with nearly three-quarters coming from radically different cultures and nations.
It’s that last bit that’s of great import: “from radically different cultures and nations.” Not just “radically different,” either, but a significant number of the newcomers are also uninterested in assimilating to their new cultural surroundings and in some instances they hate them and actively wish to change them.
The US does – or used to do – somewhat better at assimilation, but Europe historically has been much less interested in that process. Perhaps that’s because European nations are more based on a shared physical (genetic) and historical heritage and less based on shared principles (or at least overtly stated shared principles rather than subtly understood ones), whereas the US has always been composed mostly of people “from away” who have come because they are interested in liberty and opportunity.
The advent of the welfare state, both in Europe and in the US, has diluted that motive.
More from the essay:
Between 2015 and 2024, Germany’s immigrant population exploded from 11million to more than 17million. In Spain, it surged from 5.9million to close to 10million.
As in the UK, immigration is now the only reason Europe’s population is growing. Why? Because Europe’s people are no longer reproducing themselves naturally. Europe has now recorded more deaths than births every single year since 2012, with Latvia, Bulgaria and Lithuania suffering the sharpest falls. …
These trends will only accelerate unless Europe finds a way of encouraging its native population to have more children, which looks unlikely. The average fertility rate across Europe has slumped to 1.34 children per woman, sharply down from 1.46 in 2004 and well below the ‘replacement rate’ of 2.1 at which a population is considered stable. Europe’s fertility rate today is now broadly the same as the rate in the UK, where it’s dropped to 1.39, and where 40 per cent of all children now have one or two foreign-born parents.
This is a worldwide phenomenon in developed countries, and I don’t believe there’s a country so far that has successfully reversed it to any degree once it gets going.
More:
Between 2010 and 2024, in just 14 years, the share of foreign-born people in Germany rocketed from 12.9 per cent to 21 per cent. In Austria, it is 22 per cent. In Ireland, it is 23 per cent. In Sweden, it is 21 per cent. In the UK, thanks to the ‘Boriswave’, it is 20 per cent. In Spain, it’s 19 per cent. These are all record highs and point to a continent that’s being transformed in terms of both its demography and culture.
In Vienna, for instance, 42 per cent of all pupils at state schools are Muslim, while in Berlin, Hamburg, and other parts of Germany more than half of all school pupils are migrants or the children of migrants (like parts of the UK).
What was that Siege of Vienna thing about, so long ago?
It’s no wonder that politicians in such places cater to the newcomers, and elections reflect the opinions of the newcomers. For example, Mamdani’s election in New York is said to have been at least in part the result of the demographics of a city in which, according to Google AI (citing this report):
While the foreign-born population accounts for nearly 38% of New York City’s overall residents (including non-citizens), foreign-born naturalized citizens make up about 25% to 30% of the city’s eligible electorate.
More from this article:
… Europe’s ruling class has clearly decided that mass immigration is no longer just a temporary policy: it is now permanent. In effect, Europe, like other Western nations, is using large-scale immigration to compensate for the demographic collapse of its native population.
And millions of ordinary Europeans can now sense and see what this means. Entire cities set to be transformed within just one generation. A growing gulf between metropolitan elites in the rapidly diversifying cities and ordinary Europeans who live outside them. A growing sense among millions of voters that they were never properly consulted about any of these changes. And a creeping awareness that migration is not just adding to Europe’s population but is replacing it, too.
The awareness isn’t so creeping anymore. And the disdain of the “elite” rulers in Europe for the native population – especially in Britain, or maybe Britain is just the place I hear about more often – is obvious and blatant.
I think the article leaves out something I think is also operating: the virtue-signaling motive on the part of those in charge in Europe. It’s certainly not the only motive, but it’s part of it. The idea that the masses who object to their countries being transformed are racist bigots whose objections are invalid and who must be policed for those objections, and silenced harshly if necessary, is quite rampant among the government officials in Europe. The gulf is wide and the condescension is palpable.
We are a bit behind Europe in these trends, but they are present here as well. And it is quite certain the trends will accelerate if the Democrats get back into power.
Japan has thus far resisted the globalists in keeping immigration to a minimum. It seems that they’ve decided it’s better to remain Japanese and figure out a way deal with a low TFR than the alternative.
But so far, no explanation for the purpose of this clearly coordinated strategy. Did European leaders look at the birth rate worldwide, see the alarming decline, and decide that the country that is going to prosper over the next 50 years, is the country that still has people? And then further decided that yes, the native population is going to suffer, but all those imported untrained, uneducated Third Worlders will pop out lots of kids, and then in a generation or two we’ll have upgraded them to recognizable sensibilities?
I honestly can’t figure it out. What a thing to do to your population, what a thing to sneak in on the premise of thinking you know better.
And yet, the questions don’t get asked, and answers demanded, even as the people become increasingly furious.
Aggie:
I’ve certainly seen the question asked. One answer is “cheap labor.” Another is ” humanitarian reasons.” Another, IMHO (especially for Britain but for some other countries as well), it was also attempts to expiate guilt felt for having had empires. For Britain, it started with the idea that people in former colonies were subjects of the King or Queen, and entitled to come.
@Neo, yes I’ve seen such conclusions drawn before, but they are hypothetical too.
I have yet to see a policy statement explaining the phenomenon from a person in a position of implementing it, or from anybody proposing such a course be taken.
“Europe’s ruling class added 24million foreign-born residents in only 16 years, with nearly three-quarters coming from radically different cultures and nations.” neo
The goal is to create a borderless world. Europe is simply at the forefront of the Left’s political-ideological machinations.
A borderless world would require an essentially worldwide mono-culture. WEF imagines a world managed by an appointed technocratic managerial class. Who in turn are directed by an unelected elite council of ‘governors’.
The Western left deludes itself that, over time, Muslims can be brought ‘within the fold’.
Funny how Europeans moving in droves to anywhere else is called colonization and non-Europeans moving in droves from anywhere to Europe is called migration.
Colonization = bad.
Migration = good.
“This is a worldwide phenomenon in developed countries, and I don’t believe there’s a country so far that has successfully reversed it to any degree once it gets going.”
Israel never had to reverse the trend. Birth’s per woman are at 3.0 and ALL Jewish demographic groups both religious and secular are above 2.1 replacement. Jewish births per woman are even above Muslim rates in Israel.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/demographic-reversal-israel-chooses-life/
Funny how universal military service, obvious patriosm in the face of evil enemies do that. Israel’s unlike almost all Westerner countries in that they have skin in the game.
In the US 55% of Democrats want to leave (Elon U. poll – 06/02/2026) for another country and a poll in 2022 asked Americans if they would stay and fight if invaded like the Ukraine war – 52% of Democrats said they would cut and run. Republicans said stay by a big margin only 25% would leave – RINO’s and National Review readers??? – source (Wall Street Journal – 3/10/2022.)
In the US Republicans are replacing themselves but Democrats are at an abysmal 1.1 and have figured out they need new voters so you get open borders and automatic welfare. Pretty easy to figure out if you have eyes. Just copying the Euro Leftists with their insane immigration policies. Democrats hate America and apparently loathe themselves.
Are you a normal American? The Left hates you and wants you dead.
Funny how universal military service
I sometimes wonder if there is a connection between war and birthrate. It could go either way. Same with sex and violence. If I live long, enough I will be curious to see what happens in Ukraine and Russia.
John Galt III:
I have discussed the Israeli birthrate at some length in this previous post, including ideas about the reasons for it.
Cui bono?
Both Ukraine and Roosia have low birthrates, but Roosia has a much higher death rate in Vladdy’s little adventure.
There is a paper put out by the American Enterprise Institute — Will Nothing Stop the Incredible Global Birth Crash — that presents some truly shocking statistics. The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in all of East Asia (China, Japan, Tawain, South Korea) is now below one. That means for each every 100 women today, we can expect to see just 20 granddaughters.
Low fertility in Europe has been well documented and has been going on for a while but the pattern is worldwide. Uruguay’s 2024 TFR was 1,18; Chile’s 1.03; Costa Rica’s 1.12.
Israel seems to be the lone exception to drastically falling fertility. Even though TFRs in sub-Saharan Africa are still around 4, they are also falling fast.
In terms of just sheer numbers of births, France had more births in 1806 than in 2025. It is estimated that the last time Italy had as few births as it had last year was in the 1500s when da Vinci and Michelangelo were alive.
Immigration is a real problem in Europe and I have seen some pretty drastic changes in just the last few years. In Germany things just don’t work that well any more. The trains don’t run on time (sometimes they don’t run at all) and the overall quality of life is deteriorating.
But I think immigration is really just a symptom of the larger problem of cultures that seem to have run their course. Many countries have tried various economic incentives to increase fertility but without much to show for it. It seems that women just don’t want to have that many children anymore (if they choose to have any).
The sense of pride and satisfaction that comes from raising children doesn’t seem to be able to compete with the seemingly glamorous life of the single woman that is presented on social media.
We are probably very close to reaching peak human population.
I agree with Gregory. I am as vociferously opposed to global elites cramming unwanted immigrants down the throats of Americans and Europeans as anyone else here. But if we solve that we are still left with the fertility problem. The collapse in East Asia is troubling because even if the PRC is our enemy East Asians are by and large regarded as intelligent, competent, hard-working people. Who will be left in the world?
The West delenda est…
…seems a bit odd, especially when the Western elites and earnest arc-of-history global snakeoil salespeople (AKA “leadership”) are all “in” on the oh-so-humane
goalscam.But there you have it: To make a more perfect world, you hafta break a few eggs…
Long time scholar of Islam Bat Ye’or has written several books about Islam and the West, and one dealing in detail with what she says is the deliberate deal European leaders made with Muslim leaders–trading access to cheap oil in return for allowing massive migration of Muslims to the West– is her 2010 book, “Eurabia: the Euro-Arab Axis.”
Aggie: But so far, no explanation for the purpose of this clearly coordinated strategy. Did European leaders look at … I honestly can’t figure it out.
Ten, maybe twenty years ago, Jack said: Suzie says buy bonds. Does that make sense for her? Yes. Does it make sense for you? No. Suzie doesn’t live in your world.
It makes sense in the world European Leaders live in.
Neo, I couldn’t read your post nor the comments addressing it. I’m having a good day so far and I find the subject too upsetting to delve into. It really harshes my buzz.
Call it avoidance. I’ve been doing this more and more as the years accumulate. I mean, why not? How much time do I have left? Not enough to read articles that disturb me and address problems about which I can do nothing.
But I do love your writing overall.
Not sure that looking for logical rationalizations is really relevant here.
The West deserves to die.
The West NEEDS to die…according to those who have put a whole lot of thought into what’s BEST for the world and how BEST to preserve it.
How best to save it.
The West stands in the way of this oh-so-humane goal. Hence the West must be “fundamentally transformed” (obliteration being the quickest and most painless way of achieving such transformation).
But how does one convince / persuade / cajole the West itself that this is what must happen?
Easy! Make it a MORAL IMPERATIVE, of course—the MORAL IMPERATIVE of our time—while defining those who are doing the, um, “transforming” as modern-day CRUSADERS for morality, justice and humanity. (To be sure, they won’t require much persuading…)
Short version: The West represents the KULAKS of this new “inspired” era, that is, those who are preventing the implementation of PARADISE—or perhaps in this case, GLOBAL SURVIVAL. (And the Jews are the Kulaks of the Kulaks…)
As such, the destroyers of the West are the PRESERVERS, the REDEEMERS. DIVINE.
Those opposing them are Satanic.
Hans Rosling (1948-2017) was a Swedish statistician (among other things), who became famous for his data visualizations, many of which were about demographic changes.
For example, here’s a very short video illustrating how the number of babies per woman has changed in different regions: https://tinyurl.com/yptputwr
The prophet Mark Steyn (PBUH) has been sounding this alarm for twenty years. Read “America Alone” and marvel at how prescient he was.
> Are you a normal American? The Left hates you and wants you dead.
And since the Muslim immigrants also tend to be enemies of the Western society the liberals hate so much, they see them as allies. Or at least useful to have around.
Europe is now starting to see how bad that will backfire. The U.S. is a little behind, but heading in the same direction.
I know Europe, wigh little exception is going under Foreign invasion.
What about where they are coming from? The Muslim countries, are they staggering in population or since only places women have lots of children ( other discussion worth,)
Stand firm, Hungary.
One of the main problems here is that, in general, immigrants, from third world countries have much higher birthrates than those of us in the West.
For whatever reason–economic, psychological, cultural, physiological, a general lack of “civilizational confidence”–people in the West are generally having a lot fewer children than they used to, and westerners who have–on average–one or two kids are being swamped by “immigrants” who are having four, five, or six kids.
Lots of schemes to increase their birthrates have been tried by various western countries (and eastern countries–like Japan, China, and South Korea) with little success.
How to get the western birthrates back to where they should be seems to be an intractable problem.
If people don’t feel inclined to have more children–if they don’t have the “heart” to do so–there seems to be nothing you can really do to entice them to have more.
Hey you Litvaks – get busy!
Jihad loving, Jew hating Ireland.
Boil up some more popcorn.
Lots of schemes to increase their birthrates have been tried by various western countries (and eastern countries–like Japan, China, and South Korea) with little success.
==
What schemes?
Art Deco—.
I believe I’ve seen various types of tax incentives, a lump sum for each new child, a monthly stipend for each additional child, various proposals to help pay for better education of additional children, and none of these have been reported to have had any substantial effect.
It seems to me that the other major problem relates to religion/ideology.
At its founding this was a Christian nation, and the Christian religion and its precepts and expectations were woven throughout the lives of our citizens, but, as that faith and that ubiquity have faded so , it seems to me, has our confidence in our civilization and in the future.
Opposed to our formerly strong faith and the community and optimism it fostered, we now have the strong and aggressive faith/ideology of Islam, whose adherents are having far more children than we apparently demoralized native peoples are.
Art Deco –I almost forgot the various schemes to give expectant mothers a lot more paid maternity leave and, then, more time at home with their newborn before they have to return to work.
I wonder if some government somewhere has been desperate enough to consider just totally subsidizing the new family arrangement, and directly paying the family what the new mother had formerly earned working outside the home, allowing her to be a full time stay at home mother i.e. reverting to the older model that our current economic system has made so hard to actually achieve.
Then, of course, there is the destruction the Left and feminism has wrought on the idea of a women staying at home, raising the children, and being a homemaker, being “just” a “housewife,” in these ideological forces casting of this situation, inferior to her husband, being prevented from “being all she can be,” and something of a slave.
I’d imagine that this hasn’t helped family formation, and each one of those families wanting to and having greater numbers of children.
There are six millennial women in my family. Only one has one child and this via oops. I conclude that you are not going to incentivize women to have children they don’t want.
Edit: the other five are childless, unmarried and aging out.
“The US does – or used to do – somewhat better at assimilation…”
I’d agree with that, since some of my ancestors were the ones being assimilated (the others were already here). In those days, however, Immigration was allowed with some restrictions but not assisted; you had to make your own way here, and find your own place after you arrived. The system (or perhaps the lack of a system) rewarded initiative and ability.
It had drawbacks, but the “melting pot” model really worked at least some of the time. I’m not sure that it does any more.
The Left’s Gramscian “long march through the culture/institutions” was extremely careful to infiltrate and target every aspect of our western civilization, governance, society, and culture.
And that included weakening and sabotaging the three key institutions which, working together, used to make up the old “Iron Triangle” of Church, School, and Family—which used to transform new immigrants into proud Americans.
It also was of great help to this process that these immigrants had been carefully screened, and those who were not likely to be assets to our country were refused entry.
Then, in, I believe, the 1970s, our immigration system and regulations were “reformed” and made less restrictive.
See https://www.bournbrookmag.com/home/the-tragedy-of-john-cleese
He mocked the old traditional England, and now–thanks in part to him–it’s gone.
He mocked the old traditional England, and now–thanks in part to him–it’s gone.
==
Oh for crying out loud. Monty Python’s targets were features of British life ca. 1972. (Their feature films made light of Medieval folklore and the Gospels). The but of their skits could be people from any walk of life in Britain. The issue with satire and humor is that there are times when it is properly shut off. Cleese may do that in his mundane life, but he isn’t known for it publicly.
And that included weakening and sabotaging the three key institutions which, working together, used to make up the old “Iron Triangle” of Church, School, and Family—which used to transform new immigrants into proud Americans.
==
Teaching was an attractive career for leftists. That’s about the only part of this sentence which is true.
==
Religious agencies have self-immolated because there’s a certain (self-replicating) type who is attracted to employment in a philanthropic body with weak operational measures of competence who, however, does not subscribe to the supernatural element of a religious vocation and its implications. As time goes on, seriously religious people are repelled by a given institution and do not seek to enter it (and are typically not so permitted).
==
As for the family, if it was trashed by anyone it was by our malevolent legal profession, with an assist from the mental health trade and the media. They were pushing against an open door, however.
Art Deco–And what have been the political leanings of the people who have recently populated the legal profession, mental health, and the media over the last several decades ?
Snow on Pine:
Please watch the Loretta scene frok Monty Python’s The Life of Brian and tell me that they weren’t mocking where the tranny madness was going to end up in 40 years.
It is now fashionable on the right to attack Cleese. Some will do anything for clicks and views.