Crunching the Population Numbers
12 comments | Permalink
Mark Steyn writes:
Is population control a problem in the West? Should Christians seek to have less children in order to be good stewards of the earth? In light of these questions we should examine some of the statistics about what is happening to demography in the Western world.
Last night I started reading Mark Steyn's new bestselling book, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It. (It's the only book I know of that carries a blurb on the cover mocking the author: "The arrogance of Mark Steyn knows no bounds."--Prince Turki al-Faisal, Saudi Ambassador to the United States.) Steyn's thesis is that "much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries" (p. xiii). "This book is about . . . the larger forces at play in the developed world that have left Europe too enfeebled to resist its remorseless transformation into Eurabia and that call into question the future of much of the rest of the world, including the United States, Canada, and beyond. The key factors are: (1) demographic decline; (2) the unsustainability of the advanced Western social-democratic state; [and] (3) civilizational exhaustion" (pp. xv-xvi).
Now, keeping Jefferts-Schori's quote in mind, consider some quotes by Steyn with regard to what is happening to demography:
In order to have a stable population (no growth, no decline) you have to have a fertility rate of 2.1 live births per woman. Here are the current rates:
What, you ask, is thelive birthfertility rate in a country live Afghanistan? In 2005, it was 47.02 births per 1,000 people (=10.6 live births/woman). In 2006, the rate is 6.69. You do the math and ponder what that means for the shift of socio-political power in the years ahead.
Update: Thanks to the alert readers who told me I was confusing birth and fertility rates with regard to Afghanistan. I never did do well in statistics in college!
...The new Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, [is] the first woman to run a national division of the Anglican Communion. Bishop Kate gave an interview to the New York Times revealing what passes for orthodoxy in this most flexible of faiths. She was asked a simple enough question: "How many members of the Episcopal Church are there?"
"About 2.2 million," replied the presiding bishop. "It used to be larger percentage-wise, but Episcopalians tend to be better educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than other denominations."
This was a bit of a jaw-dropper even for a New York Times hackette, so, with vague memories of God saying something about going forth and multiplying floating around the back of her head, a bewildered Deborah Solomon said: "Episcopalians aren't interested in replenishing their ranks by having children?"
"No," agreed Bishop Kate. "It's probably the opposite. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion."
Is population control a problem in the West? Should Christians seek to have less children in order to be good stewards of the earth? In light of these questions we should examine some of the statistics about what is happening to demography in the Western world.
Last night I started reading Mark Steyn's new bestselling book, America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It. (It's the only book I know of that carries a blurb on the cover mocking the author: "The arrogance of Mark Steyn knows no bounds."--Prince Turki al-Faisal, Saudi Ambassador to the United States.) Steyn's thesis is that "much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries" (p. xiii). "This book is about . . . the larger forces at play in the developed world that have left Europe too enfeebled to resist its remorseless transformation into Eurabia and that call into question the future of much of the rest of the world, including the United States, Canada, and beyond. The key factors are: (1) demographic decline; (2) the unsustainability of the advanced Western social-democratic state; [and] (3) civilizational exhaustion" (pp. xv-xvi).
Now, keeping Jefferts-Schori's quote in mind, consider some quotes by Steyn with regard to what is happening to demography:
"...the salient feature of Europe, Canada, Japan, and Russia is that they're running out of babies. What's happening in the developed world is one of the fastest demographic evolutions in history" (p. xvi).
"The single most important fact about the early twenty-first century is the rapid aging of almost every developed nation other than the United States: Canada, Europe, and Japan are getting old fast, older than any functioning society has ever been and faster than any has ever aged" (p. 2).
In order to have a stable population (no growth, no decline) you have to have a fertility rate of 2.1 live births per woman. Here are the current rates:
- America: 2.11
- Ireland: 1.9
- Australia: 1.7
- Canada: 1.48 (all-time low)
- Europe as a whole: 1.38
- Japan: 1.32
- Germany and Austria: 1.3
- Russia and Italy: 1.2
- Spain: 1.1
"So Spain's population is halving with every generation. Two grown-ups have a total of one baby. So there are half as many children as parents. And a quarter as many grandchildren as grandparents. And an eighth as many great-grandchildren as great-grandparents. And after that there's no point extrapolating, because you're over the falls and it's too late to start paddling again" (p. 10).
What, you ask, is the
"Islam has youth and will, Europe has age and welfare" (p. xix).
"I wonder how many pontificators of the 'Middle East peace process ever run this number: the median age in the Gaza Strip is 15.8 years. Once you know that, all the rest is details."
"Big government depends on bigger population. . . . The progressive Left can be in favor of Big Government or population control but not both. That mutual incompatibility is about to plunge Europe into societal collapse. There is no precedent in human history for economic growth on declining human capital--and that's before anyone invented unsustainable welfare systems" (pp. 2-3).
"...demography is an existential crisis for the developed world, because the twentieth-century social-democratic state was built on a careless model that requires a constantly growing population to sustain it" (p. xix).
"The tax revenues that supporter the ever-growing numbers of the elderly and retired have to be paid by equally growing numbers of young and working. The design flaw of the radically secularist Eutopia is that it depends on a religious-society birth rate" (p. 12).
"It's not the economy, stupid. It's the stupidity, economists--the stupidity of thinking you can ignore demography" (pp. 4-5).
"Given the plummeting birth rates in Europe, Russia, Japan, etc., a large chunk of the world has evidently decided to take pre-emptive action on climate change and opt for societal suicide. The crisis we face today is the precise opposite of 'overpopulation': the developed world's population is shrinking faster than any human society not in the grip of war or disease has ever shrunk" (pp. 8-9).
"In the fourteenth century, the Black Death wiped out a third of the Continent's population; in the twenty-first, a larger proportion will disappear--in effect, by choice. We are living through a rare moment: the self-extinction of the civilization which, for good or ill, shaped the age we live in. One can cite examples of remote backward tribes who expire upon contact with the modern world, but for the modern world to expire is a turn of events future anthropologists will ponder, as we do the fall of Rome" (pp. 3-4).
Update: Thanks to the alert readers who told me I was confusing birth and fertility rates with regard to Afghanistan. I never did do well in statistics in college!



12 Comments:
Justin, is this a typo? 47.2 babies per woman? Did you switch stats...I could see where it might be 47.2 per man (4 wives, 10-11 each), but 47 births per woman seems really high.
Good post - go make another baby - we have 3 hopeful for another.
Reid:
Good catch. Sorry about that. It's per 1,000 people. So I assume that means 47.02 per 500 woman. I've edited the sentence to clarify that.
JT
Wow!
So, the shunning of large families (through abortion, birth control, peer pressure, etc.) due to selfish interests is going to result in what we do have disappearing as a result of our own selfishness.
On the side, chalk one up for the Mormons.
Very very interesting... For young people like myself, it'll be interesting to see how the world looks in 50+ years or so.
As a qualification to what Brett said, I don't think we can say that birth control is a bad thing per se... Abortion and selfishness? I'm sure we can all agree those are bad (and we should outlaw both of them!). Just wouldn't want anybody condemning my wife and me because we're waiting a few years before we have our four kids...
Cheers,
-Daniel-
(ps: Matt, did you anticipate me posting on this thread?)
The reason for the decline in live births may also be important. In the U.S. one in every four babies is aborted, in the African American community it is 4 out of 10. I am sure that Afghanistan does not have a favorable view of abortion.
Sounds like a great book!
I am a poor mathamatician at best, what would the birthrate per be if abortion were (as it should be) illegal? What would the demography of our nation look like, if all the aborted children from Roe-v-Wade were productive members of our society today? Anybody?
If you read one book the rest of the year, make it America Alone. The statistics are true and I do not believe that anyone understands how fast this will overtake the west. The geo-political ramifications are enormous for the west.
Justin,
Thanks for posting this. Fascinating stuff. "America Alone" is going on my Amazon Wishlist.
Peace,
Steve K.
Okay, then, but what about those of us who are desperately TRYING to have babies and instead we are infertile?? Nearly 20% of couples in the U.S. struggles with infertility. Given those numbers, God cannot be all THAT serious about us procreating. Instead of all this doom and gloom, why don't we try trusting God's plan for once?
May God bless you Michelle, in your persuit of a baby. Not that this will help with increasing our population, but if I may be so bold, have you considered that may be God has denied 20% of our countries population easy pregnancy, that they might turn their desire for parenthood to those children who are without, and in desperate need of parents?
Michelle,
I'm sorry that you have struggled with infertility. My wife and I have been there...seven and a half years of trying. I have also officiated five funerals of babies in the past four years in our church. This issue is very personal to me.
By God's grace my wife and I have adopted one child, given birth to two (with the help of a Christian specialist who submitted to our ethical convictions), and now have one on the way (no medical assistance this time, and thus a huge surprise). After this one, we plan on adopting again, if God wills.
I hope you and your husband are praying about adoption. It is glorious and God-honoring.
Also, I think God is pretty serious about us procreating. Whether or not you ascribe to the hermeneutical principle of "firsts" or not, there must be some significance to the fact that the first recorded command of God to man is "Be fruitful and multiply..." (Gen. 1.28). Now in regard to our inability to fulfill that command due to infertility, I think that is definitely a repurcussion of the Fall in Gen. 3. God did say that childbearing would be difficult (Gen. 3.16).
God can grow your family, it just may not be the way in which you planned. His ways are not our ways (Is. 55.8-9). But as our family has learned, oh how marvelous are His ways! I sincerely hope this has encrouaged you.
Daniel, let me clarify. I'm not necessarily saying that ALL birth control is wrong. I'm saying that birth control due to "selfish interests" are wrong. Only you and your wife know whether your use of birth control is God-honoring or selfish.
Abortion is always wrong, at least until an unborn baby comes along and consciously commits murder.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home