It is not about plain fertility rate but tipping of demographic balance between communities by various means. It can create pockets of Muslim majority in countries where they are minority and then "right to self-determination" means partitions.
> It can create pockets of Muslim majority in countries where they are minority
I assume you're talking about the Parisian "banlieues", Berlin-Neukölln and similar areas? These ghettos are the result of a mixture of gentrification and (decades of) ethnic discrimination... basically, what happens is:
First, many immigrants take up low-paid jobs in society because of language barriers or un-recognized qualification documents [1] or because of ethnic discrimination in hiring [2]. That means they are restricted to social/cheap housing by their low income.
These housing situations (sometimes quickly) deteriorate in a phenomenon called "white flight", which leads to a vicious cycle of discrimination by city quarter [3] and everyone who is able to fleeing, leading to a collapse in rents and a subsequent rise in migrant and "down on their luck" (i.e. criminals and other people unable to find regular housing) people. In the end, the government and its services as well as economy (e.g. supermarkets, small shops, ...) also retreats from such areas, leading to further decline. The people left behind then go and self-organize - some in positive forms such as ethnic grocery exports/imports stores, some in negative forms such as crime gangs.
The ethnic discrimination, especially against the young second- or third-generation migrants, also leads to a rise in gang-related crime: when schools fail to educate them, the employment market discriminates against them and cultural icons glorify a life of crime or crime is the only way to make a living without depending on social security, way too many choose the way of joining a gang.
The crime then invites politicians, usually from the Conservative to far-right, to call for "law and order" tactics from police, which leads to an increase of discrimination by police, a further split between the immigrant and indigenous population and sometimes outright ethnic riots (the London 2011 riots began with the killing of a Black suspect by police, the Paris 2005 riots began with the death of two immigrant youth who fled from police in fear of lengthy "interrogations", and the BLM-associated riots were triggered by George Floyd being murdered by police).
And historically, governments haven't exactly had a track record combatting the early signs of gentrification or ghettoization... which makes all the crying and complaining about "segregation", "parallel cultures" etc. when something happens (such as the mentioned riots, or the gang murder spree in Sweden) a bit cynical. The policies of the Conservative and far-right politicians created the very same problems they are now complaining about.
It's not about countries with 5% Muslim population and I am not talking about minor ghettos in European urban areas. Look at non-Islamic countries with 20%-25% or more Muslim population. Look at how India got partitioned based on religion and how Hindu population in Pakistan (+ Bangladesh) shrunk while Muslim population flourished in India. Look at how Muslim majority area in India like Kashmir wants to separate (and they don't want Hindus there).
You're pointing to a dynamic of urban decay and "broken windows effect", which is the exact opposite of gentrification. Minorities with a history of migration also tend to do mostly lower-skilled work, and the lower-skilled end of the labor market is the one that bears the greatest burden by far from the kind of onerous labor regulation and taxation that is especially common in France.
It's the very opposite of what a serious policy aimed at mitigating social and economic inequality should look like, but Big Government ideology is widespread enough in France that any reform is quite unthinkable there. (Germany used to be in the same boat, but they enacted reforms in the early 2000s that provided for some degree of much-needed flexibility for these marginalized workers. It's not a full UBI or even an EITC equivalent, but it's a tiny start.)
> You're pointing to a dynamic of urban decay and "broken windows effect", which is the exact opposite of gentrification.
Both go together hand-in-hand, you cannot have gentrification without an area that picks up those driven out by it.
> and the lower-skilled end of the labor market is the one that bears the greatest burden by far from the kind of onerous labor regulation and taxation that is especially common in France.
> Germany used to be in the same boat, but they enacted reforms in the early 2000s that provided for some degree of much-needed flexibility for these marginalized workers.
When comparing the employment sector in France and in Germany where the Schröder government introduced the infamous "Hartz IV" reforms in 2006, one clear thing pops out: France has a significantly lower rate of ultra-low-wage employment (8.6%) compared to Germany (20.7%). The "flexibility" only helped the ultra-low-wage employment sector to explode, a trend that only got reversed in the last few years before COVID hit [2].
Why do you say that? There’s a million differences between the populations of those three countries. For one thing, Muslim family law in India is actually a fair bit more conservative than in Pak/Bang.
Quite true. It's also the case that some situations demand a timely response, eg when a violation of some fundamental principle is occurring and ought to be interrupted. Intellectualizing everything can become an excuse for passivity. To be clear, if one is uncertain about what's going on it's generally better to hold back, but there are circumstances where someone does comprehend an issue clearly and simply wants to shirk an unpleasant engagement with it.
>>Just my humble opinions, most human beings have remarkably similar values across different culture, we all want paradoxically to belong to the herd and also distinguish ourselves from the herd.
I know you’re being downvoted but wouldn’t this be indicative of an unstable economy not an unstable marriage?
E.g., both parties may have to work and do household duties because a one-salary household is much harder to manage financially now due to wages, lack of employment stability etc.
Both ends will have extremes.
Too much calculations, too much expectations, keep hunting for better deals even after marriage, no willingness to compromise, having all eggs in spouse relationship basket and expecting her/him to play all roles, selfishness for own happiness but disregard for children's life, trivial reasons leading to breakup..
Plus culture where freedom, independence and success are more valued than institute of marriage, interdependence and family life.
Amnesty international and other Western NGOs are moral sticks of rich countries to browbeat erstwhile colonies for not maintaining high living standards post exploitation.
NGOs typically do a lot of harm. They're the means by which high income countries enforce policies that keep developing countries in debt to them, in order to extract resources.
The 2011 book "The Dictator's Handbook" does a good job of detailing how this works.
Do you understand what is first-past-the-post voting system?