The changing face of Europe

Watching England play Ghana at the WC and seeing no traditional Englishmen on the screen much of the time was a little shocking and made me wonder what’s really happening. In Europe in 2026 roughly 10% of the population were born outside the EU. But if you include the second generation….people born of immigrant parents the number is larger. Using AI here is an estimate of the share of population represented by first and second generation outside Europe immigrants since 1990.

For major Western European countries today:

For Europe as a whole, including Eastern Europe (where immigration remains much lower), a reasonable estimate is:

Europe today

1. Non-European-born immigrants: ~10%
2. Non-European immigrants + their children: ~15–20%

……..

It seems 20% is a conservative estimate. Now recognize the number will continue to rise dramatically because the immigration valve remains open and birth rates are likely to be higher in this group. A third of the population by 2040 would not be surprising with much higher percentages in cities.

Given these underlying trends and the cultural differences in countries providing these immigrants it seems baked in that Europe’s culture will be dramatically different by the middle of the century.

Nothing to see, move on. You're racist for noticing!

I suppose, but I still wonder if this is a conscious decision, a desired outcome.

The Great Replacement countries with the highest birth rate are arriving in full force. Native population growth is 1.4, far below the replacement level of 2.1. Without further immigration, it would take around 100 years for the native population to become the minority.

This analysis examines the long-term demographic effects of differing fertility rates between two population groups under a simplified model.

The starting conditions are:

1. Group A constitutes 90% of the population and has a Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 1.4.
2. Group B constitutes 10% of the population and has a TFR of 2.6.
3. No immigration occurs.
4. Both groups have identical age structures.
5. Both groups have identical mortality rates.
6. Fertility rates remain constant throughout the projection period.
7. Children remain within the demographic group of their parents.
8. 
   

A replacement fertility rate of approximately 2.1 children per woman is assumed. A population with a TFR of 2.1 will, in the long run, maintain a stable size in the absence of migration. Fertility below replacement leads to long-term decline, while fertility above replacement leads to long-term growth.

Relative Growth Rates

Using the replacement rate as a baseline:

1. Group A: 1.4 ÷ 2.1 ? 0.67
2. Group B: 2.6 ÷ 2.1 ? 1.24

This means that, over each generation:

1. Group A declines to approximately 67% of its previous size.
2. Group B grows to approximately 124% of its previous size.

The initial population ratio is:

1. Group A : Group B = 90 : 10 = 9 : 1

After each generation, the ratio changes according to:

[

9 \times \left(\frac{0.67}{1.24}\right)^n

]

where (n) represents the number of generations.

Time to Population Parity

Population parity occurs when the two groups are equal in size.

Solving for parity yields approximately:

[

n \approx 3.7 \text{ generations}

]

The resulting time frame depends on the assumed generation length:

Using the commonly applied demographic assumption of a 30-year generation length, the two groups reach approximate parity after about 110 years.

Time to Majority Status

Parity does not mean majority status. At parity, each group represents approximately 50% of the population.

For Group B to become the majority population, additional growth beyond parity is required. Continuing the same model indicates that Group B would likely exceed 50% of the total population after approximately 125–140 years, depending on the generation length assumed.

Interpretation

The demographic outcome is driven by the large difference in fertility rates. Group A's fertility rate is substantially below replacement level, resulting in sustained long-term decline. Group B's fertility rate is above replacement level, resulting in sustained long-term growth.

Because these effects compound across generations, a population that begins as only 10% of the total can eventually equal and then surpass a population that begins as 90% of the total, provided the fertility differential remains unchanged and no migration occurs.

Conclusion

Under the stated assumptions, a population consisting of 90% of individuals with a TFR of 1.4 and 10% of individuals with a TFR of 2.6 would reach approximate population parity after roughly 110 years, assuming a 30-year generation length.

The higher-fertility group would subsequently become the majority population, with majority status likely occurring approximately 125–140 years after the starting point.

‘Without further immigration’ makes a big difference. So I asked what things would look like for France as a specific example by 2050.

……..

France's non-European-origin population appears to have risen from perhaps 5–10% in 1990 to roughly 20–25% today.

If that pace continued linearly for another 25 years, you'd end up roughly around 35–45% by 2050.

So if I had to pick a single number under a "continuation of recent trends" assumption, I'd say:

Around one-third of France's population (roughly 35–40%) could have a non-European immigrant background by 2050.

The uncertainty is large enough that anything from 30% to 50% is defensible

……

This is a crude assessment, the birth rate differential has to be applied to a larger base each year, hence not linear. But the birth rates also trend back to average levels after time. And immigration also will tend to grow exponentially under fixed policies.

So this AI informed guess is probably as close as we are going to get….and dramatic enough

Yes, it is probably time to arrest illegal immigrants as they arrive., with the only legal route into a country being the refugee program- which itself should be reduced.

The expected population growth in Africa and the Middle East is growing rapidly, far too high for any economy, let alone the weaker ones.

Refugees are currently hundreds of millions around the world, but estimated to reach a billion by 2050.

Places like Nigeria, may have the biggest cities in the world by then.