Newborn in ParisBlacks,Years ago, the reason was revealed. The French don't have babies, and that's why.
France, once the dominant country in Europe, has its roots dating back to the French Revolution in 1789, and today we have spanned 233 years.
However, France's glory was not eternal, and with the rise of Germany, France began to fall into decline. During the reign of Louis XIV, France had already shown the potential to be the most powerful state in Europe, with the largest population, the largest area, and the most complete centralized system.
These three "mosts" allowed France to remain the undisputed power of Europe for the next hundred years. However, France's weakness did not happen overnight, and its roots were already evident in the era of the Revolution.
Thus, it can be said that the era of the Revolution was the beginning of the decline of France.
When the French Revolution broke out in 1789, France was an agrarian country with 59% of national income from agriculture. However, after the turmoil of the Revolution, France's industrial output did not make significant progress during the Industrial Revolution, but lagged behind.
By 1845, French agricultural output was still high at 465%, and after 56 years of development, France is still dominated by agriculture.
Even in 1890, agricultural output accounted for 35% of GDP. When the era shifted from an agrarian society to an industrial one, the measure of a country's strength was no longer population and agricultural output, but industrial strength.
In this regard, the then hegemon, Britain, is a good example. In 1800, Britain experienced the first round of industrial revolution, and its industrial output accounted for 65% of the country's output.
From this point of view, after the end of the Napoleonic Wars, France fell into stagnation and did not keep up with Britain in this era of rapid change.
Victorian England, with its relatively backward industrial equipment and lack of willingness to change, was content with the status quo, which is similar to the situation in France, as evidenced by data. According to statistics, in 1847, the number of steam engines in the French industrial sector was less than 5,000, with a total horsepower of about 620,000 horses, and at this time in Britain, in 1826, the total industrial horsepower had reached 3750,000 horses, about six times as many as in France.
In an era when horsepower represented productivity, Britain was a big step ahead of France. In addition to the gap in industrial horsepower, the gap between Britain and France in railways was also obvious.
With the advent of railroads, geographical space was no longer an insurmountable obstacle, which gave birth to the first railroad boom. In 1845, the total length of railways in France was 1,200 miles, and in more than 20 years, since the first railway was laid in 1825, Britain brought the country into an era of "railway mania" led by steam locomotives.
The British at that time were keen to invest in the construction bonds of the railway companies. From 1840 to 1845, more than 1,000 railway projects were implemented in the British private sector, and in 1845 the planned mileage reached 2,700 miles, more than twice the total length of railways in France in 1845.
The gap between Britain and France is astonishing. Why, then, did France lag behind so many years after the Revolution?
National stability is the foundation of development, and political stability is the key to national development, whether in the United Kingdom or France. However, due to the political turmoil in France, especially the revolutionary fervor of the Parisians, it has become the most politically unstable place in Europe.
This led to France falling into a disadvantageous situation at the beginning of the 19th century. In the Napoleonic era, France's agricultural production was stagnant because of its perennial wars, coupled with Britain's big policy, France's international policy was also restricted.
Under this double pressure, although Napoleon gained a great reputation in Europe, France's economic power did not increase, but continued to lose wealth due to constant wars.
In order to finance his military expenses, Napoleon even sold a large part of his colony in North America (Louisiana) to the United States at a low price.
For 30 years since the Revolution of 1792, France's political environment has been extremely unstable, with frequent internal and external problems, constant wars, and frequent interruptions in economic development, making it almost impossible for the country to invest in infrastructure and industrial construction.
A large amount of money was stripped and invested in military and war purposes, making French industrial enterprises less competitive and unable to compete with British enterprises. By about 1830, France's investment potential had not been fully activated.
On the one hand, many public construction projects have been planned for a long time but have never been completed. On the other hand, large-scale industrial enterprises coexist with a large number of small farms and handicraft workshops, the infrastructure is lagging behind, the development of large enterprises is hindered, and the survival of small workshops is difficult.
Although the French are not short of money, their enthusiasm for investment is low, and development lags behind.
Misdirection can have serious consequences. As a wealthy country in Europe, France, despite its economic strength, has chosen to invest a lot of money overseas rather than at home.
According to the data, between 1878 and 1911, the return on public bonds issued by France** was only 355%, while the average return on investing in other European countries over the same period was 475%。
This small gap in interest rate differentials has led to the loss of a large amount of French capital. Throughout the 19th century, the share of French foreign investment continued to increase, and the rate of capital outflow increased year by year, from 2% at the beginning of the 18th century, to 4% in 1890, and finally to 6% before the First World War in 1913.
Fortunately, despite the slow development of France, they were one of the most proficient overseas colonizers in Europe at the time, and the large amount of colonial income allowed them to mitigate the impact of capital outflows.
France was able to achieve an outflow of capital with the financial capital accumulated in its colonization, but it was still able to develop slowly. However, compared to the British double-headed, the French choice is problematic.
Britain used the wealth of the colonies to invest in the country and build colonies, and used the colonies to feed Britain, while France mainly relied on usury for foreign investment.
In 1914, France invested more than 60 billion francs abroad, most of which was usury, and the loans to ** alone amounted to 11.3 billion francs. In order to make ** an ally of France, France did not hesitate to spend a lot of money.
Lenin called France the source of usurious imperialism, a trend that began to emerge at the beginning of the 20th century, and France has been investing in **. ** used French money to maintain the stability of the dynasty, develop the process of industrialization, and strengthen the power of the workers, which eventually led to the downfall of the Tsar**.
After the victory of the October Revolution, the Soviet Union abrogated all Franco-Russian treaties, which allowed France's loans to be written off, which directly caused France to lose money, and the losses of the First World War made France's finances difficult.
Four: Why are the French keen to invest abroad? The answer has been revealed. The explanation is clear in terms of historical facts. In 1848, Napoleon III ran for the French ** campaign and became Emperor of France a few years later, establishing the Second French Empire.
Napoleon III was able to successfully become the ** and emperor of France, not only because of his high talent, but more importantly, because of his kindness, which made the French grateful to him.
Peasants, in particular, benefited from the Civil Code promulgated by Napoleon in 1804, taking ownership of the farmland they cultivated. The existence of this ownership made them very grateful to Napoleon and very much admired the Great.
Although Napoleon later failed, this simple feeling continued. When** elections, they see the familiar name of Napoleon III and will choose him without thinking.
The reason is simple, they don't know much about the candidates, and a name they are familiar with and a policy they are familiar with is enough to get them to vote. Napoleon III took advantage of this, succeeding in becoming the French ** and emperor.
However, as Napoleon III, who relied on the peasants to become rulers, would he turn his back on the interests of the peasants and abandon the foundations of his own rule? The answer is no. He knew that the peasants were the basis of his rule and that he could not abandon them.
However, this also meant that France lost the capital to develop its industry rapidly, that is, a large amount of industrial land.
The British enclosure movement, the strong power of the German Junker landlords, and the development of the western United States provided vast land. So, what does France have? A large class of peasants and small landowners.
In this case, you may need to protect the interests of small farmers, but this may prevent French industry from developing rapidly due to land and labor constraints. At this point, we may understand the choice of capital: it is possible to invest in French industry, but it is not very productive because there is not enough workers.
The shortage of workers will lead to lagging development, reducing efficiency and reducing profits. In addition, a large number of rural areas are undeveloped and their consumption power is insufficient, which makes it difficult to open the domestic market, and French companies have lost the internal circulation market, with fewer orders and difficulty in improving competitiveness, which will naturally lead to a lack of investment momentum.
The lack of labor and markets due to population distribution and agricultural persistence is supported by the data. Despite being a large European country, 74% of the population lived in the countryside at this point in 1880.
The large number of people in the countryside makes it difficult for France's consumption power to develop. To make matters worse, the siphon effect of Paris, the capital of France, has taken away a large number of urban populations.
In 19th-century France, Paris, as the largest city, had a population of 2.27 million, 60% more than the population of the other six cities combined. As a result, the population of other French cities was relatively small, and in some places the population size was comparable to that of today's Chinese communities.
Such a city size limits economic development because of the limited population and market size. As a result, French capitalists and financial investors began to invest their money in more active markets, such as Eastern and Southern Europe, especially the Tsars**, who were committed to industrialization.
However, this also brings with it the new problem of low per capita production in France. This problem has plagued France and continues to this day.
France's per capita output is relatively low, and this is due to the fact that in the 18th century, France's population was the highest in Europe, which made it relatively low per capita. Despite this, France's demographic superiority had helped Napoleon's success, as a large army needed population support.
However, instead of maintaining this demographic advantage, France has fallen into a cycle of stagnant population growth. This is mainly due to the French people's quest for a better life, which has led to a decline in per capita production.
Despite its low per capita output, France has been able to maintain its position as the most powerful country in Europe, thanks to its large population.
France in 1870) In the 19th century, the century of global transformation, France was once the most populous country in Europe, but from 1850 onwards, France's population growth slowed down or even experienced negative growth.
By 1911, after more than 60 years, France's population was only 39.6 million, while the rest of Europe, such as Britain and Germany, had grown to 41.5 million and 58.5 million, respectively.
The disappearance of France's demographic advantage led to economic stagnation, while Britain's rapid population growth increased its national power. Although France has developed at a slower pace than the British, the standard of living of the French has not been surpassed by the British, but has improved and they have lived a leisurely life.
This may be the choice of the French people, who do not want to be leeks of the capitalists and choose to express their attitude in terms of fertility.
Why doesn't France control population growth? Find answers from history. In France, free population growth has always been dominant, and even during the Revolution, there were advocates of adhering to the theory of free population growth.
Robespierre even declared in 1873 that parents were true citizens and that marriage was all about having children. France then implemented a series of policies to promote fertility, such as a new system that began in 1790 that freed families from state conscription, and the option of only married men with families to opt out of the army, and the 1796 enactment of a subsidy for the freedom to conceive and breastfeed.
These policies are all aimed at promoting population growth in France.
Despite a series of policies to encourage fertility, France's fertility rate continues to be depressed due to the constraints of the economic base. Whether in urban or rural areas, people's lives are under great pressure, and children have become a burden.
The existence of private farms has also made rural people wary of the dilution of their land because they have too many children, which makes it natural for them to control their births. Under the influence of the economic system, the encouragement policy of ** could not change this situation, but made the French population growth rate enter an era of negative growth.
In order to solve the problem of negative population growth, France** began to actively accept immigrants, and even relaxed the restrictions on immigrants from the former colonies and other regions through policies. This move was once seen as an effective means of increasing fertility, attracting a large number of immigrants to live in France.
However, the passage of time and the integration of immigrants have caused French society to face a series of problems. For example, the black ethnic group living in France today already accounts for 7 percent of the total population5%, which is around 5 million, and its birth rate is higher than that of native French.
Even more worrying is the fact that 60 per cent of newborns in one Paris region are of black descent, which seems to be a bit tricky. Despite France's ongoing efforts to promote immigration policy, France's demographic problem has not been fundamentally resolved.
Even with the most advantageous geographical conditions in Europe, second only to Russia and Ukraine in terms of territorial area, the population is only the fourth in Europe, less than Russia, Germany, and even the old rival Britain.
This may be a little embarrassing, it takes so much effort, and the input and output are not proportional!
The end of the French men's football team: economic growth is the key to solving all problems. In this article, I have examined the political, economic, military, and demographic relationships of France over the past two hundred years, and I have found that the reason for the low population growth rate in France may be related to the attitude of the French towards life.
If life is already comfortable enough, why destroy this state? Why do we need to care about the country's comprehensive national strength? When the French ** desperately wants to raise the population, the French answer is, we don't give birth, you find a way to go yourself.
Faced with this dilemma, France** can only choose to introduce foreign population.