"It’s the Demography, Stupid"
Un article dérangeant, drôle, sombre et plus long que d’habitude de Mark Steyn:
By 2050, there will be 100 million fewer Europeans, 100 million more Americans–and mostly red-state Americans.
In 1970, the developed world had twice as big a share of the global population as the Muslim world: 30% to 15%. By 2000, they were the same: each had about 20%. And by 2020?
Permanence is the illusion of every age. In 1913, no one thought the Russian, Austrian, German and Turkish empires would be gone within half a decade. Seventy years on, all those fellows who dismissed Reagan as an « amiable dunce » (in Clark Clifford’s phrase) assured us the Soviet Union was likewise here to stay. The CIA analysts’ position was that East Germany was the ninth biggest economic power in the world. In 1987 there was no rash of experts predicting the imminent fall of the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and the USSR itself.
This ought to be the left’s issue. I’m a conservative–I’m not entirely on board with the Islamist program when it comes to beheading sodomites and so on, but I agree Britney Spears dresses like a slut: I’m with Mullah Omar on that one. Why then, if your big thing is feminism or abortion or gay marriage, are you so certain that the cult of tolerance will prevail once the biggest demographic in your society is cheerfully intolerant? Who, after all, are going to be the first victims of the West’s collapsed birthrates? Even if one were to take the optimistic view that Europe will be able to resist the creeping imposition of Sharia currently engulfing Nigeria, it remains the case that the Muslim world is not notable for setting much store by « a woman’s right to choose, » in any sense.
To fret about what proportion of the population is « white » is grotesque and inappropriate. But it’s not about race, it’s about culture. If 100% of your population believes in liberal pluralist democracy, it doesn’t matter whether 70% of them are « white » or only 5% are. But if one part of your population believes in liberal pluralist democracy and the other doesn’t, then it becomes a matter of great importance whether the part that does is 90% of the population or only 60%, 50%, 45%.
Brrrr… ca fait froid dans le dos et fait réfléchir. Mais je reste optimiste… Sans être un déterministe technolgique pure souche, je me dis que l’explosion d’outils tels que les blogs, par exemple (cf encore l’Hebdo de ce matin), les chats et autres rendent toujours plus difficile la restriction du débat démocratique… Enfin, c’est une prière plus qu’une affirmation 😉