The Prenzlauerbergers are dying out

[imomus]

Here's an image of a wallpaper shop. Not your typical wallpaper shop, admittedly; this one looks more like a hip record store, strips of retro wallpaper in the window taking the place of the latest indie releases on boutique labels like Tomlab or Staubgold. ExtraTapete is in Prenzlauer Berg, Berlin. And standing before the store admiring its tasteful paper designs you can see one of the well-educated, well-dressed young women who make up a large percentage of the area's population.



Ah, Prenzlauer Berg! Lovely, leafy Prenzlauer Berg! Place of elegant cafes, organic vegetable markets, Slow Life and push-chairs. It's where I am right now, and as I write I can hear the voices of children on the stair. Children are the Little Princes of Prenzlauer Berg. They strut around astride little wooden bikes -- ethical toys! -- or perch on the back of the big black Dutch bicycles their parents ride up and down the sacrosanct cycle paths. They're usually toddlers, cute and cool and so German, relaxed bobo hippy children. Their parents seem to be self-employed; they're always ready to meet their kids at pre-school at 3pm and take them to play in the gardens on Helmholtz Platz.

Prenzlauer Berg is Berlin's yuppie baby boom area, the place where cool 20- and 30-somethings come to breed. It's where my friends Eric and Antonia live, with their children Lucas and Roxy. It's where other couple-friends of mine have headed to spawn, sooner or later, little Berlin-lings and Berlin-ettes, new baby Berliners.

But, according to an article in last week's Exberliner, the Germans are dying out. They're dying out because they're failing to reach the "replacement level" of 2.1 births per couple. And it's precisely in districts like Prenzlauer Berg that they're dying out fastest, for Prenzlauer Berg is full of university graduates, the group least keen to reproduce.

"Prenzlauer Berg's reported baby boom is a myth, according to the Berlin Institute for Demography, attributable largely to journalists misinterpreting birth rate figures and seeing playgrounds teeming with toddlers," Exberliner reports. "The Berlin Institute says Prenzlauer Berg is in reality one of Berlin's least fertile districts. Just 35 children per every 1000 women were born there in 2003.... Steffen Kröhnert of the Berlin Institute says that Prenzlauer Berg's figures look high at first glance because the district is home to a disproportionately large number of young women of child-bearing age. (There are twice as many women of this age [15-40] in Prenzlauer Berg as there are in Cloppenburg, for example.) "What this means is that it took double the number of women in Prenzlauer Berg to produce approximately the same amount of children as there are in Cloppenburg," says Kröhnert. "If this trend were to continue in the long term, then the number of people in Prenzlauer Berg would decrease by half with every generation. This can hardly be described as a model for the future."

Now, I seem to be attracted to places with this sort of dwindling birth scenario. As Marxy liked to point out back in his "terminal decline" days, Japan also has a serious demographic problem, with the old staying alive ever-longer, and not enough young coming along to replace them. In a recent BBC Radio 4 documentary about Japan, the message was clear: Japanese women in their 20s and 30s are increasingly preferring lapdogs to babies. It's certainly true of my friend Reika.

Of course, I'm not helping either. I haven't reproduced. I'm not sure I want to. Much as I adore my sister's kids (and, with three, she's actually increasing the population of Scotland), I don't feel children would be compatible with my glamorously uprooted lifestyle. The way I live now, I can't afford them. The Momuses are dying out, just like the Germans and the Japanese.

I take comfort in the idea, though, that, even if there are no Momuses, Germans or Japanese in the world at some future point, the idea of Momus-ness, German-ness and Japanese-ness will still be available, as essences, cultural identities, ways of thinking, living, eating, being. Synthetic lifestyles for the children who are now being born to plug into, should they want to. Of course, should they do that effectively, these kids will, themselves, fall into genetic decline, becoming, as Morrissey sings, "the last of the family line". That's something university graduates, lapdog lovers, Prenzlauer Bergers and Momuses have in common: we're all "sterilizers".

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

his rhetoric reminds me of that of european right wing parties who talk about the "islamification of europe". not to say all right wing parties are racist, but these are.

[bricology.livejournal.com]

Hmmm...well, I've lived in Europe--in a predominantly Islamic neighborhood--and it's been my experience that there is some legitimate substance behind some of the rhetoric. The trouble is that it's very tricky to distinguish between the Muslim people who are bent upon causing trouble (or at least not respecting the indigenous culture) and "all Muslim people", without sounding racist.

It's an unfortunate fact that Muslims in Europe commit more crimes per capita than their European counterparts. It's a fact that the majority of terrorist crimes in Europe today are Islamic. It's a fact that Muslim groups are causing a growing amount of public problems, such as the riots in France last year (which were, it should be remembered, predicated upon mistaken information). Nevertheless, the Muslim riots caused more than $200 million in damage and left more than 9,000 cars torched, hundreds of buildings damaged and hundreds of people injured.

Is Europe just supposed to turn a blind eye to these problems, in the name of not appearing racist or culturally intolerant? You can bet your last Euro that--if the British or French expat community in Riyadh or Rabat were burning their host country's flags and throwing Molotov cocktails at the police--the response from the Muslim world wouldn't be dispassionate rhetoric, carefully couched so as to not appear culturally intolerant.

[larameau.livejournal.com]

oops... bricology, you seem to be a praiseworthy exception to this rule

[henryperri.livejournal.com]

This is an article written in 2002 about the situation in France.

(http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_4_the_barbarians.html)

As we all saw, it came to a head 3 years later.

[henryperri.livejournal.com]

hm...not sure why that didn't show up..

http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_4_the_barbarians.html

[(Anonymous)]

even if there's truth somewhere behind their rhetoric (and i'm sure there is, just haven't experienced any of it myself), i don't think it's going to do much good unless they drop the lies and exaggerations.

i recently moved into an "immigrant-friendly" part of oslo and family and friends from the small town where i grew up often ask me about all the dangerous muslims "big city" (which is hilarious the first time...). i can't blame them, though, if i believed everything i read in the populist newspapers and heard on tv, i'd be hiding in my closet with a gun and some body armor.

exaggerating the problem only exacerbates it. relentlessly painting muslims as criminals and dangerous simply creates a greater gap between them and the "natives".
i'm not advocating turning a blind eye. just young and idealistic enough to think that some intellectual honesty would go a long way in helping immigrants fit in.

on a side note, i love (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/15/ap/world/mainD8GC6P8G0.shtml) the dutch

[larameau.livejournal.com]

you seem to imply that talking about the possibility of a future "islamification of europe" is racist and reactionary. why should it be so? let's look at it objectively. it's a perfectly realistic possibility - if the majority of europeans in twenty-five years are not white but of arab and turkish descent, then the main religion in europe will probably be islam.
do you think right-wingers are the only ones to be uncomfortable with this scenario? i don't think so. but they are the only ones who have the courage to admit it. left-wingers think it's politically uncorrect.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

I actually don't feel dismay about that prospect. For instance, today I looked at apartments in a predominantly Islamic area of Berlin (north Neukoln), and I find it the most desireable area in the city precisely because of the Islamic presence. Fantastic streetmarkets, interestingly patterned headscarves, etc. I expect no terrorism and no fundamentalism from the Turks; they are moderate and somewhat secular in outlook.

My lack of dismay doesn't come from political correctness, but from a feeling that this "Islamization" of Europe can be a good thing, culturally and demographically. In fact, I think the exchange has often been a fruitful one; Europe benefitted from Moorish Spain, for instance. I think the Euro-Turks (should Turkey be admitted to the EU eventually) will become, perhaps, more "European" than the Europeans themselves. Already, when I visit the (mostly Muslim) Maybach Ufer market, I feel like I'm in a Breughel painting. The Turks have restored a core atmosphere to Europe; they incarnate a difference which brings us back to our continental origins in the trade of the Mediterranean.

[(Anonymous)]

i couldn't agree more! i'd like to add that even more fundamentalist islamic immigrants tend to "soften" over time.

a few days ago i read about a poll done here in norway about how muslims felt about the morality of the country. apparently about 15% think norway is, in some way, immoral. which quite surprised me...if someone duplicated me a thousand times and polled all of me, i'm sure the number would be at least four times as high!

[bricology.livejournal.com]

I dunno, Nick. It seems to me like there's a prevalent, sublimated double-standard at work. On one hand, we say that the efforts of the Native Americans or Ainu or whomever to preserve their culture without dilution from other cultures, are admirable and worthy of our support. But if a nation like Germany or France or the Netherlands wants to preserve the culture they've spent centuries developing, it's branded "racist" or "intolerant". Ironically, I think that the primary forces lobbying for the inclusion of Turks and other Muslim immigrants into Western Europe are motivated by the exact same thing as motivates Bush to support the inclusion of Mexican immigrants into the US: cheap labor, rather than cultural inclusion.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

On one hand, we say that the efforts of the Native Americans or Ainu or whomever to preserve their culture without dilution from other cultures, are admirable and worthy of our support. But if a nation like Germany or France or the Netherlands wants to preserve the culture they've spent centuries developing, it's branded "racist" or "intolerant".

I don't think that's a double standard. The Native Americans and the Ainu are virtually dead cultures. Of course we can't attack them for trying to hold onto a few fragments of their decimated cultures. Don't speak ill of the dead! Support the underdog! Germany, France and Holland are not (yet) in such a pathetic state; they are still alive, and still dominant. They've only recently relinquished their colonies. It's a little early for them to pose as victims and try to win our sympathy by playing embattled, threatened little cultures on the verge of extinction! We're right to poo poo that "supervictim" tone when it comes from these nations.

And thank Allah there is a hard-nosed argument for Turkey's inclusion in the EU -- something for the culturalist arguments to ride on the coat-tails of! (By the way, it isn't just cheap labour; as in the US, it's a demographic need, when the white populations are refusing to breed.)

[larameau.livejournal.com]

yes, there's more to it than just cheap labor, and there's more to it than a demographic need - the forces lobbying for turkey's inclusion in the EU - i.e. mainly the US government - know that if this happens, then europe's political integration will probably be delayed for some 100 years. europe as it is now, politically divided, will not be a nag to the US. on the contrary, a politically integrated europe, with a common defense policy, would have the power to influence the US's political and economic decisions.

[bricology.livejournal.com]

OK, perhaps the Native Americans and Ainu weren't the most appropriate examples. Consider Tibet. Tibetans still represent a firm majority in Tibet, and they weren't really subjugated by the Chinese until the middle of the last century. And yet, they are threatened on every level by their minority Chinese occupiers. While Europe may not be similarly endangered by a militarily-superior occupying nation, they are certainly far more at risk by Islamic terrorists, simply by having Muslim immigrants and guest workers. AFAIK, all of the September 11th terrorists were legally living in the US at the time. (No, I'm not suggesting that all Muslims legally living in the US pose a terrorist threat.) And the greater threat is from those immigrants (no matter where they're from, or their ethnicity/cultural background) who do not respect European and European nation-state culture.

And consider the "ugly American" syndrome. We view Americans abroad with no cultural sensitivity as rightful pariahs, worthy of our scorn. American tourists in France who expect the French to speak English for their benefit, American tourists in Japan who unwittingly breach Japanese etiquette, American tourists in Germany who expect deference from the Germans because after all--"we won the war". I think we all agree that Americans who lack cultural sensitivity abroad are a problem. But immigrants of all origins who are insensitive to European values are expected to be accommodated by we good liberals. A generous idea, but intellectually bankrupt.

This still begs the question of why it's "necessary to breed", at least to the point of keeping up with any other population group. It presumes that a nation or union of nations can't survive with a smaller population; a notion that's never been proved, and is certainly counter-intuitive. After all, the ethnically German population of Germany was reduced by about 7% between 1939 and 1945, and much of those lost were their most viable genetic stock. If the population of the US were reduced by 7% tomorrow, I suspect we would survive just fine. A decreased population isn't inevitably a handicap, it can be a challenge with positive potential for increased resources. I don't know about your situation, but if the population of San Francisco were reduced by 7% tomorrow, I'd (1) jump for joy and (2) gladly pay 7% higher taxes in exchange for the increased space.

[lord-whimsy.livejournal.com]

"...immigrants of all origins who are insensitive to European values are expected to be accommodated by we good liberals. A generous idea, but intellectually bankrupt."

That's it, bricology--it's back to the old country with you, to purge you of these infidel thoughts!

[bricology.livejournal.com]

I tried, but they wouldn't have me!

[stanleylieber.livejournal.com]

Not German enough? :)

[larameau.livejournal.com]

"In fact, I think the exchange has often been a fruitful one; Europe benefitted from Moorish Spain, for instance"

well, since you rightly mentioned the positive side of history, i have, alas, to remind you the negative side: the hegemony of the ottoman empire was a major threat to italy (from venice to puglia), and to europe in general, from the middle ages up to as late as the end of WWI, when it finally collapsed. in 1683 the turks even laid siege to vienna. so maybe my fear of turks and muslims may be atavistic...

jokes aside, i wish i could be as optimistic as you are, momus. i know many german turks are well-integrated and feel like deutsche mitbürger. unfotunately, that's just one side of the coin. there are also many muslims - not so much turks as people coming from arab countries - who are unwilling to accept the basic laws and rules we europeans value so much.

"Islamization" of Europe can be a good thing, culturally and demographically

if "islamization" means that turks and arabs come to europe and bring with them their rich cultural tradition, well, that could not be but a good thing. the problem is that this indeed immensely rich cultural tradition today often includes radical islam - a fundamentalist, oppressive culture that strongly penalizes women, despises non-muslims, breeds internal conflict between different islamic confessions and, finally, admits of no separation between secular and sacred. all of this, including their internal conflicts, is brought to europe. in particular, the separation between the lay world and the religious world is a pillar of european civilization. without it, momus and larameau could not talk freely right now.

what concerns me most is that the majority of immigrants, even second-generation immigrants from north africa, here in italy for instance, do not feel european at all, and refuse to mix up with europeans. instead, they form closed communities.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

there are also many muslims - not so much turks as people coming from arab countries - who are unwilling to accept the basic laws and rules we europeans value so much.

This skates a little close to the arguments of Pim Fortuyn for my liking -- and I'm reminded of the irony that he was killed not by a Muslim extremist, but by a white European animal rights activist!

I'm not sure if you were around when I wrote my Secret Life of Eurabia (http://imomus.livejournal.com/164207.html) piece... You might find it interesting.

[(Anonymous)]

wonderful piece of writing, it makes me want to read through your entire archives ;;-.-;;

[larameau.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure if you were around when I wrote my Secret Life of Eurabia piece... You might find it interesting.

i wasn't around yet, so i'll read it

[larameau.livejournal.com]

you're falling into the "islam critique/defense of western values=right-wing conservatism" fallacy, momus.

when i say many muslims don't acknowledge the principles we europeans live by, i'm talking about facts.

let me give you a few examples - the first one from holland, concerning freedom of speech. when theo van gogh's film submission - exposing the plight of women in islam- came out, it was condemned and ridiculed by almost all muslim associations both in holland and abroad. the director was killed not by an animal rights activist, but by a muslim fundamentalist. the woman who wrote the screenplay - ayan hirsi ali - has also been threatened with death, and has received no solidarity whatsoever, not to speak of protection, from muslim associations.

the second example concerns the separation of religion from state.
in france two years ago a law was passed that forbade to wear any religious signs in public schools - including the muslim veil. this law was based on the fundamental principle that when you enter a public institution, like a school, you enter it as a citizen, not as a muslim or a jew, or a christian. thousands of muslim women and the majority of muslim associations protested.

a third example comes from italy, my country, and concerns the respect of the law.

there have been many reports on the italian press of muslim women refusing to remove their burqa in order for the police to identify them. they even wanted to keep their burqa on in the pictures for their papers (identity card). they said their religion forbade them to remove their veil, and they didn't care about the italian law, they only had to obey their religion. well, these may be occasional events, but i think they're eloquent enough.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

when i say many muslims don't acknowledge the principles we europeans live by, i'm talking about facts.

But it's a great European tradition to not acknowledge the principles Europeans live by! Think of Karl Marx!

What's the future of Europe going to be if we all agree on the principles we live by? Incredibly boring, I should think!

[larameau.livejournal.com]

on that i'm durchaus einverstanden. la libre pensée also entails self-critique and is a great european tradition. your writings on culture certainly embody it.

[lord-whimsy.livejournal.com]

It's also a great European tradition to devour itself on occasion, but I don't think anyone in their right mind wants that, either.

Regardless, things are certainly going to become "interesting" in 21c Europe.

[(Anonymous)]

talking about the possibility isn't racist and reactionary. talking about it as if it's really going to happen and putting forth false evidence to support your position, now that's not very nice. and that's usually what's happening.
unless you're just going to ignore statistics and science, but in that case anything is possible