Onhell said:
What do you mean by this, Perun? Are you talking about the decline of traditionally "German" population over the immigration of Turks and other ethnic groups, or despite said populations Germany as a whole is declining? Because from my understanding is that Germany has suffered from overpopulation for quite sometime now do to the sanctions imposed after WWII of having borders open and VERY lax citizenship requirements (don't know if that's a WWII by-product, but still).
I mean pretty much what I said there. The total population of Germany at the moment is 83 Million (including immigrants), and is projected to be 79 Million (including immigrants) by 2050. It is therefore one of the few countries that has a (projected) shrinking population. For the next couple of decades, there will be a stagnation, mostly because many immigrant families have a lot of kids, but that won't last forever. The main reason for this is that ever since 1968, the traditional family which I was born into (mum, dad, two to three kids, mother gives up career for family, no divorce) is considered almost as bad as a group of nazis by society.
Here's the age structure "pyramid" of Germany for 1910, 2005 and 2050 (projected):
One annotation: The big bend slightly underneath the centre in the 2005 graphic is
not due to World War 2. It occurred in the late 60s/early 70s. The WWII break can still be seen among the 80-year-olds mark.
EDIT: Maybe I should explain what I meant with "The main reason for this is that ever since 1968, the traditional family which I was born into (mum, dad, two to three kids, mother gives up career for family, no divorce) is considered almost as bad as a group of nazis by society.". I hate to say it, but I'm not exaggerating here, and I won't be with my explanation either.
In the Third Reich, there was an award called the "Mother's Cross". It was awarded to ("purely") German women who bore four children or more. This is a very convenient argument for feminists who feel offended by the fact that women can carry children and are expected to do so. So, whenever a politician so much as dares to say that we should do something against the declining population and we should have more children, those feminists come out and SCREAM "MOTHERS CROSS OMFG HES A NAZI BURN THE WITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111". And I mean it. Fine, the "burn the witch" part is never literally used, but it's what happens afterwards. The Mother's Cross parts, I have read myself several times.
A woman who decides to give up her career in favour of her children is considered a traitor to her gender. She is considered giving in to the role imposed on her by a patriarchal society, and therefore supporting said society. A woman may have children, but she must not give up more than a year of work for them. A second child is already an eyebrow-raiser. A third child is proto-fascist. A fourth child, and she's aiming for the Mother's Cross. Moreover, a good family never has more than two children. If you watch any given TV show, middle-class families always have a max of one or two children, three or more are the offspring of poor families who live on welfare. And believe me, I
wish I was exaggerating. Also, a good middle-class man or woman is expected to have been divorced at least once.
This is not an issue in public discussion. What I am describing here is just the way it is and the way I observe it, not the way any analysts see it- because it is not being analysed. Why? Because nobody dares to do so, or else they'll be branded nazis as well.
