Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is well known that many first world countries have suffered from declining birthrates over the past 40 to 50 years and this issue persists. There are varied reasons for these declines including increasing educational attainment, changes in social norms and economic pressures. This thread is not intended to debate whether population decline is good or bad; rather the intention is to debate which of our modern day nations is most at risk of ceasing to exist and why.
The study of ancient history tells us that numerous societies have prospered, declined and then disappeared over the course of human events (e.g. the Carthaginians, Romans, Ottomans, Persians, Babylonians and the Mayans) to name but a few. In many ways all of the nations that have come to power or prosperity during the twentieth and/or twenty-first centuries are unique subcultures. Out of all of these nations, which one will be the first to dwindle away or otherwise disappear and why?
I heard a program once years ago saying that the societies that have fallen in history going way back to now are the ones whom show greed. And the greed goes hand in hand to not having many children. Cant remember the reasoning on it.
I have only experienced America.
So, I really don't have an educated guess.
Although I do not like the greed I see in America such as all the what about me in our society.
My rights, my choices, my right to get married, my right yadda yadda cause of the way I am.
My vote goes to Germany. Several articles on the internet clearly indicate that Germany suffers from one of the lowest birthrates in Europe and this condition has been prevalent for approximately forty years. Government policies implemented by the Merkel administration have not had success in reversing the trend. Here is a link to just one of those articles. Kids or career: Germany’s falling birth rate dilemma | euronews, reporter
This past fall I have become friends with an immigrant from Morocco. This friend has relatives who moved from Morocco to Germany. According to my friend, the German government welcomes immigration for the purposes of boosting the population and filling jobs that native Germans just won't do. However immigrants are not only segregated in the workplace but they are also segregated socially. Apparently native Germans will not form romantic relationships with immigrants. Germany is missing out on all of the potential births from potential interracial relationships. Furthermore since immigrants are not made to feel socially welcome in Germany, many do not stay long term and put down roots leading to lower immigrant birthrates in Germany than in many of its European neighbors.
Now many people rave about Germany's economy citing engineering marvels like BMW and other auto manufacturers. Germany does produce phenomenal engineering. However that cultural focus on engineering comes with a price. Many German companies are managed very rigidly. We also see this rigidity manifest itself in the reluctance of native Germans to socially embrace the immigrants. I can speak from experience that German leadership is very risk averse and inflexible. Outside the field of engineering, Germans are not strong producers of creativity which limits their strategic thinking. Despite Germany's current strength in engineering, prosperity and growth are achieved through managing change. It is my assertion that the Germans do not manage change well, that change will manage them instead and eventually snuff out their culture. Their engineering success has only been in place for approximately 50 years (post WWII) which is hardly the test of time.
Well, I guess if this conversation were to be had, you'd have to define what you mean by disappear. For example, even though Rome has fallen from what it once was, many would argue it simply transitioned into something different(current day Italy)
Take Japan for example(known for their declining birth rate). Even with with a declining population, I don't think the Island of Japan will ever be uninhabited. The people there may change their traditions, but if that's all it takes for a society to end, then we ended the society of the US long ago. The US of today could easily be considered a different country from the US of 300 years ago, much the same way England today is a different country than England 300 years ago.
It really comes down to "What is a society?" because society changes every few generations no matter what. Technology alone will do that for you, regardless of politics or anything else.
My vote goes to Germany. Several articles on the internet clearly indicate that Germany suffers from one of the lowest birthrates in Europe and this condition has been prevalent for approximately forty years. Government policies implemented by the Merkel administration have not had success in reversing the trend...
Interestingly, Jews -mostly from Russia, Ukraine, Poland but also from Canada, US, and Israel are emigrating to Germany. Berlin has over 50,000 Jews when just a generation ago it was 5,000. According to an article I read in The Jewish Daily Forward last year, over 100,000 Jewish immigrants entered Germany since 2003.
It is well known that many first world countries have suffered from declining birthrates over the past 40 to 50 years and this issue persists. There are varied reasons for these declines including increasing educational attainment, changes in social norms and economic pressures. This thread is not intended to debate whether population decline is good or bad; rather the intention is to debate which of our modern day nations is most at risk of ceasing to exist and why.
The study of ancient history tells us that numerous societies have prospered, declined and then disappeared over the course of human events (e.g. the Carthaginians, Romans, Ottomans, Persians, Babylonians and the Mayans) to name but a few. In many ways all of the nations that have come to power or prosperity during the twentieth and/or twenty-first centuries are unique subcultures. Out of all of these nations, which one will be the first to dwindle away or otherwise disappear and why?
I think pure WASPs in the USA are becoming extinct. Everybody is mixing nowadays.
Also, pure Native Americans are dying out or mixing. Their populations are really low.
First, Rome did not disappear. Rome took the interesting path of continually absorbing cultures--not merely subjugating and exterminating other peoples, but assimilating them and making them Romans. And as well, Rome adopted many characteristics of other cultures, which brought vibrancy and endurance to the Empire.
Remembering that the Roman empire had accepted Christianity more than a century before it began to crumble, it's probably worth exploring what role the entanglement of the state with an exclusive religion might have had. I suspect that Christianity limited the very factors that gave the empire endurance.
To a great extent, an iron age empire can be only so large simply because of the primitive state of communication and transportation. But for its times, Rome was exceedingly resilient until the adoption of Christianity as an exclusive national religion.
Even then, I could argue that the Roman empire yet endures--I suspect that if you plucked an ancient Roman from his time and set him in modern Washington DC, he'd study the currency, the buildings, the language and finally conclude that the US was a far-flung, possibly long-isolated, province of the empire.
To the extent that any modern civilization similarly adopts, adapts, and assimilates other peoples, it will evolve and essentially continue. Therefore, we might see non-assimilating cultures disappear.
First, Rome did not disappear. Rome took the interesting path of continually absorbing cultures--not merely subjugating and exterminating other peoples, but assimilating them and making them Romans. And as well, Rome adopted many characteristics of other cultures, which brought vibrancy and endurance to the Empire.
Remembering that the Roman empire had accepted Christianity more than a century before it began to crumble, it's probably worth exploring what role the entanglement of the state with an exclusive religion might have had. I suspect that Christianity limited the very factors that gave the empire endurance.
To a great extent, an iron age empire can be only so large simply because of the primitive state of communication and transportation. But for its times, Rome was exceedingly resilient until the adoption of Christianity as an exclusive national religion.
Even then, I could argue that the Roman empire yet endures--I suspect that if you plucked an ancient Roman from his time and set him in modern Washington DC, he'd study the currency, the buildings, the language and finally conclude that the US was a far-flung, possibly long-isolated, province of the empire.
That is a very interesting take on the Roman empire. To further your point, to this day we still use their language in science and medicine. I never really realized the link between a state sponsored religion and the decline of the dominance of their civilization. It makes me ponder the long term viability of the Islamic nations in and around the middle east.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
To the extent that any modern civilization similarly adopts, adapts, and assimilates other peoples, it will evolve and essentially continue. Therefore, we might see non-assimilating cultures disappear.
This is exactly my sentiment. I think those countries that continue to assimilate immigrants and adapt by embracing some new cultural traditions will continue to survive and even prosper. I think the United States will fall into this category however the hardcore Christian element of US society may not like the changes. In the future they may have to accept the new social changes or emigrate to a place that emphasizes their social values. Will there be such a place thirty or even fifty years from now?
Europe will be an interesting case. On the one hand the British (from my perspective) seem to embrace immigration and multiculturalism, at least on the surface as seen by an outsider. Whereas ethnic Germans seem to hold a standoffish view of immigration. They will allow immigrants into the country for economic reasons but also keep them at arms length socially.
They will allow immigrants into the country for economic reasons but also keep them at arms length socially.
There is really a kind of distance - but it is more by religion and culture. Most of the immigrants are from areas with "archaic" traditions. It is hard for them to socialize with the germans ( and other europeans ) and vice versa.
Successful Immigration is very hard - especialy for many of the *muslim crowd* in a modern western society.
Immigration is not as simple as it seems.
But i dont think, that a society will disappear - the transition goes on and on and on.....................................
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
