Comments on: The Real Threat http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2006/02/27/the-real-threat/ A Journal of Jewish Thought and Opinion Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:08:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Charles B. Hall, PhD http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2006/02/27/the-real-threat/#comment-52563 Charles B. Hall, PhD Wed, 01 Mar 2006 01:04:49 +0000 http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2006/02/27/the-real-threat/#comment-52563 There are a number of problems with this article. First, the prediction that Europe will become Muslim is nonsense. France has the largest Muslim population in Western Europe and even there it is only 10-12%, similar to the population of African Americans in the US. And no other comes close. There ARE a few countries in Eastern Europe that have been predominently Muslim for centuries (Albania and Bosnia) but they are both small countries and their citizens are emigrating elsewhere. Second, it is simply false that European countries did little for their own defense, as implied by the article. Many have compulsary military service, which drives down the cost of maintaining a military (you don't have to pay soldiers very much when they don't have a choice). And no European country had significant worldwide military responsibilities after the 1960s. Furthermore, some neutral European countries such as Sweden and Switzerland had huge military establishments. Third, the UN reports Spain's fertility rate as 1.3, not 1.1. This was an easy one to check; I'm surprised the author didn't do his homework. http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/indicators.cfm?x=291&y=2&z=2 While the United States at 2.0 is higher than any western European country, it is not much higher than France and Ireland at 1.9, or Norway and Denmark at 1.8, or a half dozen countries at 1.7. In any case, even the US's 2.0 is below replacement rate, and most of the population growth in the US in the future will be due to immigration. What bears well for the US is that it has done a much better job of integrating immigrants into its society than just about any country in Europe. Hopefully that will continue. How ridiculous is the author's premise -- that religious societies reproduce more -- is shown by Poland, by all accounts one of the most religious (Roman Catholic) societies in the world. It checks in at 1.3. Malta, equally devout, checks in at 1.5. The author is also inconsistent when he talks about supposedly unsupportable employement benefits. If the benefits are unsupportable, the jobs will go elsewhere. But earlier in the article, he worries about a labor shortage! He can't have it both ways. Finally, even with the low birthrates in many countries, Europe is far from depopulated. Population densities in the Rhine valley, much of Britain, and northern Italy far exceed that of the northeastern US. Admittedly the northern parts of Norway, Sweden, and Finland are pretty unpopulated -- but they have always been. I worry more about Iran's bomb. There are a number of problems with this article. First, the prediction that Europe will become Muslim is nonsense. France
has the largest Muslim population in Western Europe and even there it is only 10-12%, similar to the population of
African Americans in the US. And no other comes close. There ARE a few countries in Eastern Europe that have been predominently
Muslim for centuries (Albania and Bosnia) but they are both small countries and their citizens are emigrating elsewhere.

Second, it is simply false that European countries did little for their own defense, as implied by the article.
Many have compulsary military service, which drives down the cost of maintaining a military (you don’t have to pay
soldiers very much when they don’t have a choice). And no European country had significant worldwide military
responsibilities after the 1960s. Furthermore, some neutral European countries such as Sweden and Switzerland
had huge military establishments.

Third, the UN reports Spain’s fertility rate as 1.3, not 1.1. This was an easy one to check; I’m surprised the author didn’t
do his homework. http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/indicators.cfm?x=291&y=2&z=2 While the United States at 2.0 is
higher than any western European country, it is not much higher than France and Ireland at 1.9, or Norway and Denmark at
1.8, or a half dozen countries at 1.7. In any case, even the US’s 2.0 is below replacement rate, and most of the
population growth in the US in the future will be due to immigration. What bears well for the US is that it has done a
much better job of integrating immigrants into its society than just about any country in Europe. Hopefully that will
continue. How ridiculous is the author’s premise — that religious societies reproduce more — is shown by Poland, by all
accounts one of the most religious (Roman Catholic) societies in the world. It checks in at 1.3. Malta, equally devout,
checks in at 1.5.

The author is also inconsistent when he talks about supposedly unsupportable employement benefits. If the benefits are
unsupportable, the jobs will go elsewhere. But earlier in the article, he worries about a labor shortage! He can’t
have it both ways.

Finally, even with the low birthrates in many countries, Europe is far from depopulated. Population densities
in the Rhine valley, much of Britain, and northern Italy far exceed that of the northeastern US. Admittedly the northern
parts of Norway, Sweden, and Finland are pretty unpopulated — but they have always been.

I worry more about Iran’s bomb.

]]>