One of the better comments responding to the Asian elephant in the room. This elephant is that Japan's modern per capita prosperity, demonstrates that a shrinking national gdp does not equate to a shrinking per capita gdp, and that replacing the indigenous nation with groups from less developed societies, has no real purpose for indigenous European populations.
Further, low crime, and social cohesion, and a guaranteed future of a recognizable Japan, shows what Japan has preserved and achieved where the Western world has utterly failed. Rather than trying to secure safe and relatively secure conditions for its people, Western elites have been doing the most counterintuitive thing imaginable since the 1960's, in furiously replacing their own people with millions from elsewhere, to appease some abstract virtue of "economic growth", the imperative for which is not translatable into the wellbeing of the actual people of the nations pursuing it. Where the West is facing a future in which its native progeny will become minorities in their own increasingly violent and militarized societies, Japan will have a safe prosperous and recognizably Japanese future in which the progeny of the modern Japanese will have a sense of collective purpose and identity that extends back generations. Once the TEMPORARY population bubble pops, the strain on public services will be diminished, and a now smaller Japanese population will enjoy the high rates of automation upon which their new economy will be built.
Japan is showing in no uncertain terms that permanently destroying nations whose members connect to a history extending back thousands of years is an absurd solution to the temporary problem of a baby boomer population bubble. That’s right boomers, you will die, and your children will inherit nations in which they are alienated minorities with no ability to control their future through any democratic political apparatus, because they will be outnumbered by different groups of people, with different histories, and different ideas about what’s best for their future. Your grandchildren and great grandchildren will live in nations entirely unrecognizable, and the legacy left by your parents and their parents before, going back thousands of years, will be lost forever.
When the progeny of the "new Dutch", or "new Swedes", find themselves without an identity in the West and wish to rediscover their roots, they may choose to go to Pakistan or Somalia, which will be filled with people who look like them, who share their ancestry, share their history, and share their culture. Where will your progeny be able to go to find a place of belonging, historical connection, and identity? What an astonishing betrayal the boomers have committed against their descendants. The comment that prompted this frustrated screed is below:
"People look at GDP relative to other countries as the be all and end all.
But surely it is domestic product PER HEAD of population which is a better indicator of national prosperity.
From the fifties onwards the UK accepted increasing levels of immigration to fill perceived labour shortages.
Japan decided to remain an homogenous nation and invested more heavily in advanced automation. One result is that there are Japanese cars all over the world and no longer any British owned volume car manufacturers.
Britain can no longer exercise any control over immigration from EU countries and the previous Labour government deliberately opened the flood gates to Third World immigration, affectively “electing a new people” which, they calculated, would be inclined to vote for them.
People are not merely units of production and consumption. There is no particular advantage to the individual in living in a country with the biggest economy, if income per head declines. There are also huge social problems, caused by large scale immigration of peoples whose culture and loyalties are far different to the host country.
In evidence to the House of Lords Committee on immigration, Peter Sutherland ( former EU Coomissioner, former head of WTO, Goldman Sachs panjandrum and UN chief of migration policy) said that the EU should increase migration ” to break up homogenous people’s” . This is social engineering on a massive, global scale. But for whose benefit? Certainly not the host population. Such a policy could never have been enforced by democratic means.
It is massively arrogant."
No feedback yet
Form is loading...