Muslim Population Problem Sri Lankan

Muslims at the cross roads - 17

By Izeth Hussain-September 19, 2014, 12:00 pm
The statistical table given above can be interpreted in more than one way.
Between 1981 and !1 the Buddhist population increased "rom #9.$!%
to &!.19%' the Hindu population decreased "rom 1(.)8% to 1.#1%' the
*uslim population increased "rom &.(#% to 9.&1%' the +hristian
population decreased "rom &.#% to &.)(%. The *uslim population
increased there"ore by more than double the percentage increase o" the
Buddhist population. The magnitude o" that increase can be better
appreciated i" it is seen in absolute numbers. ,rom 1981 to !1 the
Buddhist population went up "rom 1!'88'$!! to 1)''8)) while the
*uslims went up "rom 1'11'&!! to 1'9#&'&.
- reader argues the "ollowing case' using a di""erent set o" statistics "or the
period 1981 to !11.*uslim population increased "rom 1'!)#'9!! .&.o(%/
to 1'8#9'8! .9.$%/' an over-all increase o" 8'9! .&8.#!%/.0uring
the same period the over-all increase o" the island1s population was "rom
1)'8)#'8!! to !'#$'&$' that is an increase by (')1#'9$.$#.)8%/.
There"ore the population increase o" the *uslims by &8.#!% is double that
o" the national average increase by $#.)8%.
That' on the "ace o" it' establishes beyond dispute that by an ineluctable
process 2ri 3an4a will become a predominantly *uslim country by !(!. I
have not been able to access on the internet the BB21 views on *uslim
population increase' but very probably the details in the preceding
paragraph gives the essence o" the BB2 case. It "its in nicely with the
Islamophobic nightmare that be"ore long Islam will become the
predominant religion not only in 2ri 3an4a but in the world and Islamic
power will hold sway over the globe.
In e5posing the Islamophobia behind the above argument' we must "irst o"
all as4 the "ollowing 6uestion7 why is it that when population statistics are
available "or a hundred and thirty years' that is since 1881' the "ocus has
been on the period 1981 to !18 -"ter all' we all 4now that a"ter 198$
there was a thirty year war during which the normal processes o"
population growth would be disrupted' "or which reason it would be absurd
to e5trapolate into the "uture as secular trends abnormal developments o"
the war period. ,or instance' the Tamil population growth rate dropped
during that period obviously because o" the huge number o" Tamil deaths
during the war and even more because o" mass migration. It would be
absurd to e5trapolate "rom that a continuing drop in the growth rate o" the
Tamil population. In the case o" the *uslims' it seems obvious that that
period was chosen because it showed something thoroughly abnormal 9
whatever may be the reason - in the growth rate o" the *uslim population7
a % leap "orward that enabled the argument that the *uslim population
increase by &8.#!% is double that o" the national average o" $#.)8%.
It can be shown in the perspective o" population statistics since 1881 that
that *uslim % leap "orward was something thoroughly abnormal.
Between 1881 and 1981 the *uslim population was virtually static7 &.1&%
in 1881 and &.(#% in 1981. :n the other hand the Buddhist population
increased "rom #1. ($% in 1881 to #9.$!% in 1981. In a hundred years
there"ore the *uslim population increased marginally by !.$9%' which in
absolute numbers amounts to !.9) million while the Buddhist population
increased by &.&% which in absolute terms amounts to 8.(9 millions. In
this perspective the e5pectation that the *uslims will become the
dominant ma;ority by !(! is preposterous.
But we have to account "or that *uslim % leap "orward. I have made
many en6uiries and "ind that while several possible reasons are mentioned
no one is certain about a de"initive e5planation. It would there"ore be idle
to speculate on the possible reasons at this point. However I sought the
views o" a pro"essional demographer who has not been "orthcoming with a
de"initive e5planation but is 6uite certain that it does not represent a trend
o" *uslim population increase "or the "uture. His e5pectation is that in the
long term the *uslims will amount to 1!% o" the population' the 2inhalese
to &!%' and the total population will stabilize around $ million.
I will now set out the reasons why I thin4 the % leap "orward to which I
have re"erred above has to be regarded as an aberration' and why I thin4
that the "uture *uslim population increase would be along the lines
indicated by the statistics "rom 1881 to 1981. ,irst o" all' we must get rid
o" the widespread notion that Islam is against birth control. I see that a
Tamil doctor with a bac4ground o" e5pertise in demography shares this
notion. The truth is that Islam' li4e the other great world religions' can be
interpreted in varied ways' and I daresay that some or many *uslims will
hold that Islam "orbids birth control. The boo4 3e rendez-vous des
civilisations by <ousse" +ourbage and =mmanuel Todd 9 the "ormer a
demographer and the latter a political scientist who was trained as a
demographer 9 declares that in comparison with +hristianity >Islam is
more tolerant towards pleasure and certain "orms o" contraception' the
practice o" which can e""ectively lower the birth-rate. The azl' or coitus
interruptus' was accepted by *ohammed and' by e5tension' Islam
tolerates all the other "orms o" contraception>.
But what really matters is practice' not precept. I grew up in a traditional
*uslim household and underwent training in Islam by a series o" lebbes
who never told me anything either "or or against birth control' which
conse6uently never "igured in my consciousness. *uslims o" those days 9
the ?thirties I mean 9 had huge "amilies usually numbering well over "ive'
but the number went down during the ?"orties and in recent decades the
average *uslim "amily would have two to "our children' the same as
2inhalese and Tamil "amilies. I believe that a"ter the demographic
transition to smaller "amilies ta4es place' the average o" the number o"
children does not go up again' most certainly not to the huge e5tent o" the
*uslim population increase "rom 1881 to !1. -s I said earlier that
increase has to be investigated. @hat we have to e5pect there"ore is
*uslim population increase according to the norms established during the
hundred year period "rom 1881 to 1981. The e5pectation that 2ri 3an4a
will become a *uslim ma;ority country by !(! is no more than an
e5pression o" racist Islamophobia.
It has to be e5pected also that our *uslim population' in accordance with
international norms' will not 4eep on increasing inde"initely. +ourbage and
Todd in their boo4' published in !!&' state that when they were students
the populations o" the third world seemed to be engaged in a process o"
inde"inite and uncontrollable increase' engendered by declining mortality
and high birth rates. The vicious cycle o" population increase and economic
stagnation was one o" the givens in social studies o" that time. But since
then' during the last thirty years' they have seen a control o" "ecundity
ta4ing place in all the continents and almost in every country' including the
*uslim ones. They write' >Hence"orth the rate o" "ecundity in Iran and
Tunisia will be the same as in ,rance>. Their boo4 "ocuses on the
demography o" the Islamic world and provides a mass o" statistics that
e5plode s4y-high the Islamophobic notion that the *uslims will be"ore long
come to dominate the world numerically.
.To be continued/
izethhussainAgmail.com
Posted by Thavam