In two hours my housekeeper will be here! When she arrives I will leave to buy groceries and then get gas! I will pay her very well for doing half of what is on the list! Tonight I will sleep well looking forward to watching golf this weekend! The yard guys have things looking good!
Well, there are some food net exporters in Africa but the FAO food insecurity map and Maplecroft's global map of food security paint a very different picture. The Ivory Coast for example exports coffee, cashews and rubber but imports rice and wheat.
There are about six African nations that reliably export staples. Six. Versus ~35-40 net importers (heavily dependent on rice, wheat, or maize imports). Do you see the problem?
There's also nothing hinting at an end to the ballooning of African populations.
Africa's population is projected to grow to 2.5 billion people by 2050 and 4 billion by 2100 with half of its population living in cities by 2030. How on earth are they supposed to be fine when they can't even feed their people now?
Fuel won't dry up overnight. Still, I agree that European nations are probably too caught up in the existing paradigm to switch to a more sustainable model. But over here, population pressures will decrease over the next two generations and Europe is more than capable to produce enough food even if the transition period will be rough. In the twenties and thirties Berlin was sustained more or less completely by its surrounding areas while having a larger population than today.
Of course living standards will have to be scaled shown significantly, while quality of life will go up (depending on who you ask).
Without global trade routes (which are falling apart as we speak 😉) places like 🇳🇱 starves to death.
Africans meanwhile have sufficient arable land and low tech means to cultivate them. Europeans have complex systems that require industrial inputs which (again) need those complex logistical networks.
Africa doesn’t have this issue… to use an analogy, they are “closer to the ground” as the forest fires begin & destroy all the trees that are taller & more densely packed together.
Re; energy. Consult the citations & bibliography please. Your take is too optimistic given the empirical data. By mid century & beyond, most developed nations will have acute shortages in most key areas. 😉
It seems pretty obvious that Europeans are equally able to cultivate land by low tech means. You can grow vegetables for a hundred people with three, for guys easily. In fact, I've done just that the last years. I'm just WAITING for the time when conventional crop farming becomes unsustainable, we'll have those huge stretches of land that they waste on rapeseed oil production converted to cattle pastures in no time. 😉
How you can assume Africans would manage this with their insane population growth when they're not doing it even now its beyond me but I noticed you backing of your claim that they are net producers moving it to "they could if they had to" when I presented the statistics.
I wish them all the best but you yourself predicted a steep decline in the global population. If you don't think this would affect the one continental population with the most and unsustainable growth the most, I don't get your reasoning.
Netherlands can only function if tankers of American Oil show up, along with fertilizers & other cheap inputs. These economies run on HUGE levels of complexity, which fall apart during Supply shocks & outages. Ditto for most of the other European nations. Just because a few families can do 'old school' techniques doesn't mean everyone can... millions will starve once you see mass agricultural failures thanks to Energy & Material Shortages & Outages.
Africa (as I noted earlier) is 'closer to the ground' on the forest floor & will be less affected. Their rapid population growth will mean Mass Climate Migrations northward, where Warbands & Substate Actors comprising 20-30 year old men will be defeating 50-60 year old men, whose technological edge will be scant, & who will barely have any cheap inputs left to properly upkeep their armies.
Africa will do well ('well' is relative here, they will also see tens of millions perish) because their farmlands, material yields, etc are a lot less reliant on these complex networks. & since they also will have a young population that is military aged by century's end, some of that can be mitigated by 'taking slaves & making slaves' of others, as well as devouring their lands, peoples, women, etc, for the benefit of Africans’ back home.' That’s the thing, yeah? People need to differentiate between what a Whole society at the Macro is *locked into* due to centuries of mass complexification vs what individuals at the micro can do.
Recently, I've convinced several Dutch ranchers to migrate to "greener pasture". To build the first of many self-sufficient community, primarily focusing on localising the entire livestock supply chain. Somewhere far away from the madness and stupidity of the EU bureaucracy
"Once we calibrate the data from around a decade ago, today’s massive yields from synthetic fertilizers likely feed well over half the World."
An insane system, when one considers that literally billions of people live under conditions they couldn't ever sustain themselves. The moment food imports to Africa stop, hundreds of millions of people will die. If one looks up the relevant food security maps, there aren't many regions in the world that wouldn't see a massive die-off.
Most African nations actually make more than enough food for themselves and will be fine:
It is so called developed nations in Europe and beyond who actually are not self sufficient as they import nearly all their oil and gas… they would starve first while the Africans will do fine. In a low tech scenario late 21st century, that’s what the numbers for energy production and other variables indicate 😉
Hard disagree. The ONLY thing maintaining the influx of foreigners is decades-long institutional support. Western Europeans as in everywhere westward of the former Iron Curtain will be very hard-pressed, since ethnic hostilities will only increase when the supply situation worsens but this will only widen the faltlines. There will be either a European Western Europe or a Muslim/Arab one. I don't see an eastern European scenario in which outsiders make significant headway.
The whole affair will be very ugly regardless of the outcome.
What you aren’t factoring in is the fact that median ages in 🇵🇱, 🇷🇺 & beyond won’t be able to sustain complex systems like internal security and standing militaries soon & hence, migrations of central Asian men will overwhelm them.
I don’t disagree that there is an element of institutional rot… but that’s secondary to the demographic winter and related variables which are playing the key role here. What we call the “Great Replacement” is something that I see (and it is hinted in the piece) as a natural consequence of Demographic Winter & Ethnogenesis.
Sure, everything behind the Ural might be lost but that's not part of Europe anyway and also very late acquisitions of the Russian empire. I don't see it happening to any core territories.
Nothing natural about decades of importing culturally and racially foreign people while fostering self-loathing narratives among the native populations. This happens as natural as integration in American schools did - under threat by the barrel of a gun.
If a society in the early 2100s has a median age of 55+… it will not have men for the army, infrastructure projects, policing, etc.
Criminals, Terrorists, Warlords & Substate actors (who are composed of men in their 20s & whatnot) will basically overwhelm them.
In the ascension phase (a la industrial society & its rise) the force multiplier was fossil fuels & materials like steel, ammonia, concrete & plastics.
In the descension phase, the force *divider* will be weakening demography, materials, energy, technology & ecology.
Based on those metrics, 🇷🇺 will have a large Turkic-slavo component to it in the coming several decades & centuries.
In 2100 foreign ethnicities will be long gone from Europe. And a lot of Europeans will have died, too.
"Estimated Military-Aged Men (18–49) in Europe (EU + Non-EU) in 2100
Total projected male population (18–49): ~ 60–80 million"
- deepseek
Yeah, I think that will be enough men. And these are projections assuming current birthrates, materially challenging times might very well change these. We're still two generations away. But with the deaths and mayhem that'll come before, the numbers might be accurate again. We'll see.
I don't see a catastrophic end to existence either but neither a steady decline. The current societal situation is wholly artificial. When governments aren't able anymore to keep a lid on it, can you imagine how riots like Newcastle last year or even Chemnitz a couple of years ago will turn out?
I like your overall vision for the future anyway but will end this with a quote:
"The goys in Europe are always hard/
Try to take our shit, we'll pull your card/
We know nothing in life but hard work and war/
You gonna die here boy, just like the ones before" - Mr. Bond 😉
I would be careful using LLMs. They are fun, but they get lots of things wrong a la self-hallucinating & solipsism.
In the Footnotes, I reference the UN Medium scenario, which is (again) optimistic & assumes nothing externally shocking like Wars, Famines, etc.
Based on those optimistic projections, Europe would have tens of millions fewer people in 2100+ than today.
Here’s the thing about 'having enough men.'...
Just because there are (say) 20 million people left in Poland (roughly what the UN Medium says) doesn't mean they can do anything.
Many of them will be in their 50s & 60s & will be incapable of Brute Labour intensive work, being Vanguard & Infantry, etc.
It's not just about quantity (which will be diminished), but they will also be older, sicker, more likely to capitulate, slower reaction Time (read: Dead on the Deindustrial battlefield).
Your read on things is too optimistic. There is no escape:
Every govt tomorrow can 'magically' disappear & be replaced by more 'based' governments, & the Demographic Winter (& its corollaries) would still mean you have a bunch of 50+ year olds who cannot fight.
This is not about Knowledge, Values &/or Willpower.
It's about Muscle & Kinetic ability, downstream from Biophysical Limits.
Europe is Dead, so is most of the wider West. You can stick a fork in it, & it will simply play itself out in the rest of this century’s remainder.
There are no permanent nations & peoples. Climate Migrations, Wars of Succession & Mass Ethnogenesis will mean the birth of Eurabia, Eurafrica & Eurosiberia, at the expense of today's Aging & Moribund Europeans. This is a standard repeating pattern in Human History (namely, the Old being Replaced by the Young), & the numbers & trends today indicate that is precisely where the Great Replacement & its corollaries are presently headed.
You know, I wanna stay polite. Here's the thing about enough men. Enough men are enough men. I gave you the number of projected fighting-aged men. It doesn't matter at all if there are slightly more men that don't fall into this category.
The fact that I have to explain this tells me something.
I don't need "based government". If you think Africa can self-organize, be sure that we can, too.
But you know what, you seem a little to enthusiastic about the supposed "death of Europe" so I'll chalk up your lapses of logic to motivated reasoning.
Agriculture, Migration & other human activities over the past several millenia have shifted considerably due to minute changes in soil, water & temperature.
So it’s real, but it’s not of the Al Gore “everyone will die tomorrow! 😭 “ apocalypse variety.
When I say climate change, I am talking about those big historical shifts in the former, as opposed to the MSM silliness of the latter.
"Steady Restoration of natural carbon sinks like forests & wetlands will play a central role in addressing climate change & ensuring global carbon neutrality."
In the available records Co2 follows temperature, not the other way around. Carbon is not an issue.
For sure. Regarding the world climate, it's such a complex system that we can't really reliably model its development (apart from some few events) as you probably know, no matter what. Still, complexity notwithstanding, Co2 doesn't seem to show up anywhere on the cause side of the equation. This is still the one single factor mentioned in your piece so you do seem to see it as a relevant factor.
If you have a giant spinning top and you use a small finger to twirl it just a bit, even though the top is a complex system with multiple causal loops… that tiny twirl can completely throw things off kilter thanks to the randomness/stocashtics of it.
Carbon is like that. It’s not that “it will kill everyone tomorrow” but rather that the complexity of the societies we enjoy today… a la agriculture and other things gets thrown off kilter.
John Mearshimer as well as others say a World War like conflict is impossible due to interconnected economies (which I admit is coming apart as we speak) and more importantly nuclear weapons. I agree with his assessment. That is why I find it hard to believe that WW3 would occur at all. I think it is more likely that countries collapse in on themselves rather than kinetic warfare between nuclear armed nations. What do you think about this?
Even if that does happen, it would simply mean that global conflicts will be between substate entities using mixed technology (high & low tech) coupled with weapons of mass destruction, & spread out across the world in a hodge podge of myriad conflicts taking place simultaneously.
For example- by late 21st century many parts of the world will have numerous water & resource conflicts (Haiti & Congo style) using pick up trucks, motorcycles, biochemical weapons, dirty nukes, etc.
That in my books is a de facto “World war” even if it’s not done via state actors.
We shouldn't forget that localised forms of governance also mean traditional forms of governance based on hereditary aristocracy and monarchy. As micro-management becomes impossible with technological deterioration, I could see a return to feudal systems.
In two hours my housekeeper will be here! When she arrives I will leave to buy groceries and then get gas! I will pay her very well for doing half of what is on the list! Tonight I will sleep well looking forward to watching golf this weekend! The yard guys have things looking good!
Well, there are some food net exporters in Africa but the FAO food insecurity map and Maplecroft's global map of food security paint a very different picture. The Ivory Coast for example exports coffee, cashews and rubber but imports rice and wheat.
There are about six African nations that reliably export staples. Six. Versus ~35-40 net importers (heavily dependent on rice, wheat, or maize imports). Do you see the problem?
There's also nothing hinting at an end to the ballooning of African populations.
Africa's population is projected to grow to 2.5 billion people by 2050 and 4 billion by 2100 with half of its population living in cities by 2030. How on earth are they supposed to be fine when they can't even feed their people now?
Fuel won't dry up overnight. Still, I agree that European nations are probably too caught up in the existing paradigm to switch to a more sustainable model. But over here, population pressures will decrease over the next two generations and Europe is more than capable to produce enough food even if the transition period will be rough. In the twenties and thirties Berlin was sustained more or less completely by its surrounding areas while having a larger population than today.
Of course living standards will have to be scaled shown significantly, while quality of life will go up (depending on who you ask).
Without global trade routes (which are falling apart as we speak 😉) places like 🇳🇱 starves to death.
Africans meanwhile have sufficient arable land and low tech means to cultivate them. Europeans have complex systems that require industrial inputs which (again) need those complex logistical networks.
Africa doesn’t have this issue… to use an analogy, they are “closer to the ground” as the forest fires begin & destroy all the trees that are taller & more densely packed together.
Re; energy. Consult the citations & bibliography please. Your take is too optimistic given the empirical data. By mid century & beyond, most developed nations will have acute shortages in most key areas. 😉
It seems pretty obvious that Europeans are equally able to cultivate land by low tech means. You can grow vegetables for a hundred people with three, for guys easily. In fact, I've done just that the last years. I'm just WAITING for the time when conventional crop farming becomes unsustainable, we'll have those huge stretches of land that they waste on rapeseed oil production converted to cattle pastures in no time. 😉
How you can assume Africans would manage this with their insane population growth when they're not doing it even now its beyond me but I noticed you backing of your claim that they are net producers moving it to "they could if they had to" when I presented the statistics.
I wish them all the best but you yourself predicted a steep decline in the global population. If you don't think this would affect the one continental population with the most and unsustainable growth the most, I don't get your reasoning.
They can't. Here's the thing:
Netherlands can only function if tankers of American Oil show up, along with fertilizers & other cheap inputs. These economies run on HUGE levels of complexity, which fall apart during Supply shocks & outages. Ditto for most of the other European nations. Just because a few families can do 'old school' techniques doesn't mean everyone can... millions will starve once you see mass agricultural failures thanks to Energy & Material Shortages & Outages.
Africa (as I noted earlier) is 'closer to the ground' on the forest floor & will be less affected. Their rapid population growth will mean Mass Climate Migrations northward, where Warbands & Substate Actors comprising 20-30 year old men will be defeating 50-60 year old men, whose technological edge will be scant, & who will barely have any cheap inputs left to properly upkeep their armies.
Africa will do well ('well' is relative here, they will also see tens of millions perish) because their farmlands, material yields, etc are a lot less reliant on these complex networks. & since they also will have a young population that is military aged by century's end, some of that can be mitigated by 'taking slaves & making slaves' of others, as well as devouring their lands, peoples, women, etc, for the benefit of Africans’ back home.' That’s the thing, yeah? People need to differentiate between what a Whole society at the Macro is *locked into* due to centuries of mass complexification vs what individuals at the micro can do.
Recently, I've convinced several Dutch ranchers to migrate to "greener pasture". To build the first of many self-sufficient community, primarily focusing on localising the entire livestock supply chain. Somewhere far away from the madness and stupidity of the EU bureaucracy
"Once we calibrate the data from around a decade ago, today’s massive yields from synthetic fertilizers likely feed well over half the World."
An insane system, when one considers that literally billions of people live under conditions they couldn't ever sustain themselves. The moment food imports to Africa stop, hundreds of millions of people will die. If one looks up the relevant food security maps, there aren't many regions in the world that wouldn't see a massive die-off.
I recommend you look into Burkina Faso's recent improvement on its agriculture production
Most African nations actually make more than enough food for themselves and will be fine:
It is so called developed nations in Europe and beyond who actually are not self sufficient as they import nearly all their oil and gas… they would starve first while the Africans will do fine. In a low tech scenario late 21st century, that’s what the numbers for energy production and other variables indicate 😉
Hard disagree. The ONLY thing maintaining the influx of foreigners is decades-long institutional support. Western Europeans as in everywhere westward of the former Iron Curtain will be very hard-pressed, since ethnic hostilities will only increase when the supply situation worsens but this will only widen the faltlines. There will be either a European Western Europe or a Muslim/Arab one. I don't see an eastern European scenario in which outsiders make significant headway.
The whole affair will be very ugly regardless of the outcome.
What you aren’t factoring in is the fact that median ages in 🇵🇱, 🇷🇺 & beyond won’t be able to sustain complex systems like internal security and standing militaries soon & hence, migrations of central Asian men will overwhelm them.
I don’t disagree that there is an element of institutional rot… but that’s secondary to the demographic winter and related variables which are playing the key role here. What we call the “Great Replacement” is something that I see (and it is hinted in the piece) as a natural consequence of Demographic Winter & Ethnogenesis.
Sure, everything behind the Ural might be lost but that's not part of Europe anyway and also very late acquisitions of the Russian empire. I don't see it happening to any core territories.
Nothing natural about decades of importing culturally and racially foreign people while fostering self-loathing narratives among the native populations. This happens as natural as integration in American schools did - under threat by the barrel of a gun.
Let me simplify it even further:
If a society in the early 2100s has a median age of 55+… it will not have men for the army, infrastructure projects, policing, etc.
Criminals, Terrorists, Warlords & Substate actors (who are composed of men in their 20s & whatnot) will basically overwhelm them.
In the ascension phase (a la industrial society & its rise) the force multiplier was fossil fuels & materials like steel, ammonia, concrete & plastics.
In the descension phase, the force *divider* will be weakening demography, materials, energy, technology & ecology.
Based on those metrics, 🇷🇺 will have a large Turkic-slavo component to it in the coming several decades & centuries.
In 2100 foreign ethnicities will be long gone from Europe. And a lot of Europeans will have died, too.
"Estimated Military-Aged Men (18–49) in Europe (EU + Non-EU) in 2100
Total projected male population (18–49): ~ 60–80 million"
- deepseek
Yeah, I think that will be enough men. And these are projections assuming current birthrates, materially challenging times might very well change these. We're still two generations away. But with the deaths and mayhem that'll come before, the numbers might be accurate again. We'll see.
I don't see a catastrophic end to existence either but neither a steady decline. The current societal situation is wholly artificial. When governments aren't able anymore to keep a lid on it, can you imagine how riots like Newcastle last year or even Chemnitz a couple of years ago will turn out?
I like your overall vision for the future anyway but will end this with a quote:
"The goys in Europe are always hard/
Try to take our shit, we'll pull your card/
We know nothing in life but hard work and war/
You gonna die here boy, just like the ones before" - Mr. Bond 😉
I would be careful using LLMs. They are fun, but they get lots of things wrong a la self-hallucinating & solipsism.
In the Footnotes, I reference the UN Medium scenario, which is (again) optimistic & assumes nothing externally shocking like Wars, Famines, etc.
Based on those optimistic projections, Europe would have tens of millions fewer people in 2100+ than today.
Here’s the thing about 'having enough men.'...
Just because there are (say) 20 million people left in Poland (roughly what the UN Medium says) doesn't mean they can do anything.
Many of them will be in their 50s & 60s & will be incapable of Brute Labour intensive work, being Vanguard & Infantry, etc.
It's not just about quantity (which will be diminished), but they will also be older, sicker, more likely to capitulate, slower reaction Time (read: Dead on the Deindustrial battlefield).
Your read on things is too optimistic. There is no escape:
Every govt tomorrow can 'magically' disappear & be replaced by more 'based' governments, & the Demographic Winter (& its corollaries) would still mean you have a bunch of 50+ year olds who cannot fight.
This is not about Knowledge, Values &/or Willpower.
It's about Muscle & Kinetic ability, downstream from Biophysical Limits.
Europe is Dead, so is most of the wider West. You can stick a fork in it, & it will simply play itself out in the rest of this century’s remainder.
There are no permanent nations & peoples. Climate Migrations, Wars of Succession & Mass Ethnogenesis will mean the birth of Eurabia, Eurafrica & Eurosiberia, at the expense of today's Aging & Moribund Europeans. This is a standard repeating pattern in Human History (namely, the Old being Replaced by the Young), & the numbers & trends today indicate that is precisely where the Great Replacement & its corollaries are presently headed.
You know, I wanna stay polite. Here's the thing about enough men. Enough men are enough men. I gave you the number of projected fighting-aged men. It doesn't matter at all if there are slightly more men that don't fall into this category.
The fact that I have to explain this tells me something.
I don't need "based government". If you think Africa can self-organize, be sure that we can, too.
But you know what, you seem a little to enthusiastic about the supposed "death of Europe" so I'll chalk up your lapses of logic to motivated reasoning.
Climate change is bs though
Agriculture, Migration & other human activities over the past several millenia have shifted considerably due to minute changes in soil, water & temperature.
So it’s real, but it’s not of the Al Gore “everyone will die tomorrow! 😭 “ apocalypse variety.
When I say climate change, I am talking about those big historical shifts in the former, as opposed to the MSM silliness of the latter.
For example, due to the coming grand solar minimum, crop yields will diminish significantly in northern Eurasia between 2030 and 2040.
Ah ok gotcha!
"Steady Restoration of natural carbon sinks like forests & wetlands will play a central role in addressing climate change & ensuring global carbon neutrality."
In the available records Co2 follows temperature, not the other way around. Carbon is not an issue.
Complex systems have multiple causal loops 😉 it’s not an “either or” nor is it a “what is the cause & what is the effect?” Issue.
Please don't take this as general criticism as I'm commenting as I read along. I like your piece a lot so far.
All thoughtful criticism is welcome! No need to apologize! 😊
For sure. Regarding the world climate, it's such a complex system that we can't really reliably model its development (apart from some few events) as you probably know, no matter what. Still, complexity notwithstanding, Co2 doesn't seem to show up anywhere on the cause side of the equation. This is still the one single factor mentioned in your piece so you do seem to see it as a relevant factor.
Think of it this way-
If you have a giant spinning top and you use a small finger to twirl it just a bit, even though the top is a complex system with multiple causal loops… that tiny twirl can completely throw things off kilter thanks to the randomness/stocashtics of it.
Carbon is like that. It’s not that “it will kill everyone tomorrow” but rather that the complexity of the societies we enjoy today… a la agriculture and other things gets thrown off kilter.
Hope that analogy makes sense! 😉
John Mearshimer as well as others say a World War like conflict is impossible due to interconnected economies (which I admit is coming apart as we speak) and more importantly nuclear weapons. I agree with his assessment. That is why I find it hard to believe that WW3 would occur at all. I think it is more likely that countries collapse in on themselves rather than kinetic warfare between nuclear armed nations. What do you think about this?
Even if that does happen, it would simply mean that global conflicts will be between substate entities using mixed technology (high & low tech) coupled with weapons of mass destruction, & spread out across the world in a hodge podge of myriad conflicts taking place simultaneously.
For example- by late 21st century many parts of the world will have numerous water & resource conflicts (Haiti & Congo style) using pick up trucks, motorcycles, biochemical weapons, dirty nukes, etc.
That in my books is a de facto “World war” even if it’s not done via state actors.
Hope that makes sense! 😉
We shouldn't forget that localised forms of governance also mean traditional forms of governance based on hereditary aristocracy and monarchy. As micro-management becomes impossible with technological deterioration, I could see a return to feudal systems.
Bulgaria is not falling apart?
Refer to the footnotes 😉
Eastern Europe will be heavily depopulated by century’s end. That includes 🇧🇬, 🇵🇱, etc. 😉
Let's look at the data...
https://open.substack.com/pub/dakelly/p/hans-roslings-factfulness?r=gc2d2&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web