The Rise of Islam In The UK: A Demographic And Cultural Shift

[Marilyn C]

2 hours ago, chirpy said:

Just a thought - maybe not the A/C, but the false prophet as the Mahdi.... bringing in a global false religion and support for the lawless one while representing Islam.

worth keeping an eye on him.

The global false religion is already here - The United Nations moral philosophy that everyone has to obey - respect, tolerance, etc otherwise you will be fined or jailed. 

Also, Ali Hatem (interesting name in English) is not a religious zealot like ISIL but seeking National interests. Thus, he is Political.

[other one]

18 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

The United Nations moral philosophy that everyone has to obey

That went into the UN in the mid 80s from the New Age people in the 60s and 70s who were following Alice Bailey who took over from Helena Blavatsky.    And they taught the Nazis.

[Ogner]

"It All Doesn’t Matter Because Humanity Has 300–500 Years Left"

South Korea: An Extreme Example
Let’s start with South Korea. The fertility rate there is 0.72 children per woman (2023). For comparison: to keep the population from shrinking, you need at least 2.1. Without migrants, in 100 years, only 20 million Koreans will remain instead of the current 51 million, and in 200–300 years, almost none. The reasons are simple but terrifying:

• Young people study until they’re 25–30, build careers, while medically, it’s best to have kids before 35.
• Housing in Seoul costs as much as a spaceship, and work means 50+ hours a week in fierce competition.
• Women, tired of being both "mothers and careerists," just say "no" to kids—hence the 4B movement (no marriage, no children, no dating, no sex).

The economy still relies on exports and chaebols like Samsung, but soon there won’t be enough workers. The army is shrinking too—20 years from now, there’ll be a third fewer conscripts, and that’s with North Korea looming. The government spends billions on family subsidies, but the birth rate isn’t rising. Why? Money doesn’t solve the issues of time, stress, and culture.

It’s Not Just Korea
A similar story unfolds in 50 developed countries. Japan (1.26), Italy (1.2), Spain (1.19), Germany (1.58)—all below 2.1. Without migrants, their populations are already shrinking or soon will. Some places (Germany, Canada) are saved by an influx of foreigners, but not Korea or Japan—they value ethnic purity. The result: either decline or cultural transformation.

Migrants are a temporary fix. Their kids, once adapted, also have fewer children. In a couple of generations, you need new migrants. But here’s the paradox: by 2100, even Africa and Asia will shift to low birth rates (UN forecast). Where will the people come from then?

Capitalism vs. Demography
The system’s to blame. Corporations profit when we work more, not when we’re on maternity leave. Parental leave? Extra costs. Sick days for childcare? Loss of efficiency. Meanwhile, young people, trapped in the race for success, choose careers over diapers. Housing’s expensive, healthcare too, and you work until burnout. Governments shout "have kids!" but won’t touch the root—labor markets and culture.

What’s Next?
If nothing changes, here’s the scenario:

• 50–100 years: Developed countries cling to migrants. Native populations either die out or dissolve into a new multicultural reality.
• 100–150 years: Birth rates drop everywhere, migrants run out, and the world’s population shrinks.
• 300–500 years: At a fertility rate of 1.5, humanity dwindles to 1 billion, then 200 million, then nearly zero. If it hits 0.7, like in Korea, it’s 150–200 years.

Sounds like sci-fi, but the math is straightforward: each generation smaller than the last.

 

Immigration: Saving the Country, but Not the People
Immigration could sustain South Korea’s population and economy, as it does in Germany or Canada. For instance, an influx of migrants from Southeast Asia (Vietnam, the Philippines) or other regions could slow the decline and provide a workforce. However, it won’t "save" the ethnic Korean people in their pure form:

• Ethnic Transformation: As the proportion of migrants and their descendants grows (especially through mixed marriages), South Korea’s population will become less homogeneous. Currently, Koreans make up 96–98% of the population, but mass immigration would reduce that share.
• Cultural Erosion: Korean culture, language, and traditions could partially dissolve under the influence of new groups, especially if migrants don’t fully assimilate. South Korea has historically resisted multiculturalism, but demographic pressure might force a change.
• Genetic Aspect: If we define "people" through the lens of genetics, then yes, the share of ethnic Koreans will shrink, potentially becoming a minority in their own country within a few generations.

Thus, immigration would save South Korea as a state (its economy, infrastructure, and political system), but it would transform it into something different from today’s monoethnic nation.

Migration Won’t Save the Korean People as Such
You’re right: migration won’t boost birth rates among ethnic Koreans or halt their demographic decline. It will merely replace the shrinking population with new people who won’t carry Korean identity in the traditional sense. Even if migrants assimilate (which happens slowly in South Korea due to cultural barriers), they won’t "revive" the Korean people as an ethnic group.