Denmark Abolishes Itself

In recent years the Danish government has implemented a series of politically incorrect changes to its immigration policies, tightening restrictions, reducing benefits, deporting migrant offenders, and other measures to prevent immigration or induce new arrivals to repatriate themselves.

However, the demographic statistics for the past year seem to indicate that the government’s actions are too little, too late: during a twelve-month period non-Western immigrants and their descendants accounted for 94% of the country’s population increase.

Many thanks to Tania Groth for translating this brief article from NewsPeek:

The number of people of non-Western background in Denmark is growing much faster than the number of Danes.

The balance between Danes and people of non-Western background has reached a tipping point in recent years. Since it is an exponential development, this process will continue to accelerate.

In the past year the population of Danes increased by only 577. By comparison, the number of immigrants and descendants with a non-Western background grew by 8,937 people. Thus the number of people with a non-Western background has been growing more than 15 times faster than that of the Danes. This can be seen from a graph from Statistics Denmark, according to the award-winning blog Uriasposten.

During the third quarter of 2018 there were 499,903 immigrants of non-Western background and their descendants in Denmark.

Out of curiosity I crunched some hypothetical numbers to try to get an idea of how long it would be before the culture-enrichers outnumber the Danes in Denmark. I had to make a series of assumptions in order to produce the demographic projection below (the word “immigrants” is used here to mean non-Western immigrants):

1.   The current ethnic Danish population of Denmark is 5 million.
2.   The current number of immigrants and their descendants is 250,000, i.e. a little less than 5% of the population.
3.   The Danish population is growing at an annual rate of 0.011%, i.e. the same as shown in the graph.
4.   The immigrant population (or rather that of their descendants) is growing at an annual rate of 3.58%, i.e. the same as shown in the graph.
5.   No further immigrants will arrive in Denmark, and none of their descendants will emigrate.

Those are some pretty big assumptions. In fact, there’s no way that those annual rates of increase will remain the same for ninety years. The current situation will become unsustainable when the number of culture-enrichers reaches a certain proportion of the population, but it’s hard to say exactly what that proportion is — 15%? 25%? 50%? I don’t think anyone knows.

However, just to demonstrate the power of exponential growth, this table shows that if the current rates continue, the population of culture-enrichers will exceed the population of Danes for the first time in the year 2103:

Year   Native   Migrant   Year   Native   Migrant
2017   5,000,000   250,000   2062   5,024,810   1,217,183
2018   5,000,550   258,950   2063   5,025,363   1,260,758
2019   5,001,100   268,220   2064   5,025,916   1,305,893
2020   5,001,650   277,823   2065   5,026,468   1,352,644
2021   5,002,200   287,769   2066   5,027,021   1,401,069
2022   5,002,751   298,071   2067   5,027,574   1,451,227
2023   5,003,301   308,742   2068   5,028,127   1,503,181
2024   5,003,851   319,795   2069   5,028,680   1,556,995
2025   5,004,402   331,243   2070   5,029,234   1,612,735
2026   5,004,952   343,102   2071   5,029,787   1,670,471
2027   5,005,503   355,385   2072   5,030,340   1,730,274
2028   5,006,053   368,108   2073   5,030,893   1,792,218
2029   5,006,604   381,286   2074   5,031,447   1,856,379
2030   5,007,155   394,936   2075   5,032,000   1,922,838
2031   5,007,706   409,075   2076   5,032,554   1,991,675
2032   5,008,256   423,720   2077   5,033,107   2,062,977
2033   5,008,807   438,889   2078   5,033,661   2,136,832
2034   5,009,358   454,601   2079   5,034,215   2,213,330
2035   5,009,909   470,876   2080   5,034,768   2,292,567
2036   5,010,460   487,733   2081   5,035,322   2,374,641
2037   5,011,012   505,194   2082   5,035,876   2,459,654
2038   5,011,563   523,280   2083   5,036,430   2,547,709
2039   5,012,114   542,013   2084   5,036,984   2,638,917
2040   5,012,665   561,417   2085   5,037,538   2,733,390
2041   5,013,217   581,516   2086   5,038,092   2,831,246
2042   5,013,768   602,334   2087   5,038,646   2,932,604
2043   5,014,320   623,898   2088   5,039,201   3,037,592
2044   5,014,871   646,234   2089   5,039,755   3,146,337
2045   5,015,423   669,369   2090   5,040,309   3,258,976
2046   5,015,975   693,332   2091   5,040,864   3,375,648
2047   5,016,526   718,153   2092   5,041,418   3,496,496
2048   5,017,078   743,863   2093   5,041,973   3,621,670
2049   5,017,630   770,494   2094   5,042,528   3,751,326
2050   5,018,182   798,077   2095   5,043,082   3,885,624
2051   5,018,734   826,648   2096   5,043,637   4,024,729
2052   5,019,286   856,242   2097   5,044,192   4,168,814
2053   5,019,838   886,896   2098   5,044,747   4,318,058
2054   5,020,390   918,647   2099   5,045,302   4,472,644
2055   5,020,943   951,534   2100   5,045,856   4,632,765
2056   5,021,495   985,599   2101   5,046,412   4,798,618
2057   5,022,047   1,020,884   2102   5,046,967   4,970,408
2058   5,022,600   1,057,431   2103   5,047,522   5,148,349
2059   5,023,152   1,095,287   2104   5,048,077   5,332,660
2060   5,023,705   1,134,499   2105   5,048,632   5,523,569
2061   5,024,257   1,175,114   2106   5,049,188   5,721,313

So what will change between now and 2103? Will Denmark find additional ways to encourage (or compel) its Muslim population to emigrate? Will ethnic Danes start making more babies? Or will they surrender to the inevitable, stop making babies entirely, and let the Muslims establish a Danish Emirate?

And just think — this is the projection for Denmark, which has one of the most anti-immigration governments in Western Europe. Can you imagine what the projection would look like for Germany or Sweden?

If This Goes On…

14 thoughts on “Denmark Abolishes Itself

  1. Will ethnic Danes start making more babies?

    It boggles the mind to consider that ethnic Danes only had 500+ babies last year!

    Is someone feeding them anti-fertility pills? The advent of a new baby into an ethnic Danish family must be considered a miracle of sorts??

    How very sad.

  2. I’ll give a program that will give a fighting chance to the Danes. Notice this does not involve any draconian measures against immigrants.

    1) Abolish no-fault divorce and enforce alimony, particularly the male paying to the female.

    To have more babies, women need to start having children early, and with the absence of alimony, a woman feels that she is vulnerable by not building career skills when acting as a stay-at-home mother. Alimony recognizes the contribution of the woman in a symbiotic pair.

    2) Institute complete freedom-of-association, including the right of housing developers to exclude people on racial or religious grounds, as long as they are not receiving public subsidies. Clubs may exclude people, employers may hire whomever they wish and schools may choose on the basis of ethnicity, social status, or whatever basis they wish, again as long as they do it with private, and not public, funds..

    This gives the opportunity for healthy Danes to associate with healthy Danes, including the ability of parents to put their children in an environment which contains only eligible mates for their children. There is scientific evidence that a high load of mutant genes affects not only looks, but ability to function and the ability to bear children. By allowing a highly-selective environment for healthy Danes of child-bearing age, you increase the proportion of healthy individuals able and willing to have children. I make the proviso that these places have to be privately funded because it is not fair to have people pay taxes to subsidize places that exclude them.

    Eliminate public support of medical treatment and housing, including and especially mothers and expectant mothers. If the migrants are disproportionately likely to be dependent on public welfare, this would affect the survival of many of the immigrant children. This is another selection pressure in favor of Danes with a high proportion of functional genes. To be fair, this measure would have no affect on immigrants if the immigrants themselves were as productive as Danes. The higher the proportion of healthy genes, the more likely the Danish mother and father would be to have and support children.

    3) Get rid of public education. Doing so would not only allow frank discussion of how healthy it is for young adults to be discriminatory in the mates and potential mates they select, but would allow parents to further control the surroundings of their children at a vulnerable age.

    I emphasize that none of these measures can be considered to be actions against immigrants or anyone else. In fact, instituting these points. the Danes could have a far higher rate of increase than they do now, even if the migrants and migrant stock have children at the rate they do currently. If the migrants are acting as parasites, drawing out more welfare and support than they put in, the measures might affect their life style and the survival of their children. Hopefully, those who feel aggrieved at not receiving the benefits they expected will go back to their native countries, where they can get the support they need.

    • “Alimony recognizes the contribution of the woman in a symbiotic pair.”

      …or, as many men who have to pay alimony would tell you, alimony makes them slaves to their former wifes who took their property, took away their children, and now make them work and pay them even though they hate them…

      There used to be one big institution that protected mothers from the vulnerabilities of motherhood: It was called “Marriage”.

      • Yeah. I recognize your problems. Notice I said to do away with no-fault divorce, which presumably means that a woman can’t get a divorce with alimony simply because she feels like it.

        But, the problem you bring up is absolutely real, particularly with the huge advantage women have in any legal action against males. My proposal was made in an attempt to create a fertile environment for couples to have and raise children. I don’t have a ready answer for your very important counter-example.

    • Your arguments in # 2 were the ones of Thilo Sarrazin in 2009, Germany is doing away with itself. He said it would be a benefit for society to give 50,000$ to a young mother with university education for every birth instead of pampering unproductive growth in the lower classes( I beg your pardon for the wording).
      To abolish alimony by ways of tax-funded welfare would certainly encourage young women to scrutinize more thoroughly what type of man to associate with and a more rigid enforcement of the fathers alimony would make the males think twice if ” your place or mine”.
      The danish aspect pointed out here has a positive side to it, however longterm: when the muslims are in majority and have transformed the country into what Trump called &!%¥🚽 holes ,they will leave for greener gras.

      • Thank you, but I would oppose the idea of government paying directly for women to have babies, particularly based on university education, which is kind of an IQ marker. The logical conclusion of that direction is to have government pay women to have babies, the amount being dependent on the IQ of the mother.

        I think that direct action for the government to encourage having babies and raising the level of the population would have the same effect as any other social engineering objective of any government: it would screw it up entirely.

        In the first place, this does nothing to encourage a stable, two-parent household for raising children. In the second place, there are other characteristics besides IQ that are very important. Government bureaucrats are highly-verbal (a major component of IQ) but can’t do anything. You could be subsidizing more and more bureaucrats and gender-studies professors. The East Asians (Chinese) are high-IQ, but even with the huge strides Chinese are only recently making, our country is far more productive and pleasant than theirs. As the saying goes “If you’re so smart, why ain’t you rich?”.

        I’m not so sure the university-educated should be encouraged at the expense of the “lower classes”. It depends if you’re talking about welfare-takers, laborers, skilled craftsmen, merchants or small farmer-businessmen. I have no more confidence that government can navigate the complex waters of selecting desirable people to procreate than I have that government can actually build and run all the factories and enterprises for a vibrant economy. The role of government is to create a fair and secure superstructure, and get out of the way.

        I sound like a libertarian, but I do believe there is a place for protected markets. Steven Bannon, in a brilliant interview with Mike Cernovich, asserts that China is in an economic war with the US, and one component of China’s strategy is to deindustrialize, through subsidies, large parts of the US. For sure, there’s a place there for protected markets through tariffs by the government.

        • Thanks. I always appreciate your comments to mine.Sometimes, I tend to verbal gunslinging and accept reprimands.
          Indeed, there is a eugenic touch to it.(cf. Julian- not Aldous- Huxley) and the consequences of increasing high IQs to higher ones through education can enhance the proliferation of a sort of Mandarin- class gender and bureaucrats. And to use your punchline invertedly: I am not rich, so I must be dumb. Well, sort of.

  3. this was always the plan of your communist politicians. they tell you not to have children, they promote abortion, they pay the people they want to have children to have more through the welfare state. this is the conquest through colonization the communists started forty years ago after they gave up on conquest through military conquest and revolution.

  4. There are only 5 1/2 million Danes and only 10 million Swedes. These are astonishingly small populations. Bleeding heart libs will go overboard to save snail darters and let entire ancient peoples with their own history art and language die in a matter of generations.

  5. Hi Baron, something goes wrong, I cite from the article:

    “…During the third quarter of 2018 there were 499,903 immigrants of non-Western background and their descendants in Denmark…”

    “…The current number of immigrants and their descendants is 250,000, i.e. a little less than 5% of the population…”

    If we take the first statistic from the article, they are already nearly 10%, so the end is closer than we think.

    • You’re quite right; I missed that little tidbit. That may make it worse.

      I’ll adjust the program code and re-run it tomorrow, and then post a new table. The recalculation is not straightforward, because the larger culture-enricher population actually reduces the rate of increase for the migrants. We’ll see how it turns out.

      • and would it be possible to distinguish between the different groups of ” non- western” immigrants? Last time I checked, Koreans or Japanese never make it into the papers for attacking police or paramedics( do you have that in the States at all?)

Comments are closed.