On the rare chance that anyone in organized Objectivism Land actually reads anything that challenges some of their core beliefs, I would like to introduce them to Islam's "Rule of Numbers".
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/...
The rule:
"It reflects what I call “Islam’s Rule of Numbers,” a rule that expresses itself with remarkable consistency: The more Muslims grow in numbers, the more Islamic phenomena intrinsic to the Muslim world—in this case, brazen violence against “infidels”—appear."
The escalation phenomenon:
In the U.S., where Muslims are less than 1% of the population, London-style attacks are uncommon. Islamic assertiveness is limited to political activism dedicated to portraying Islam as a “religion of peace,” and sporadic, but clandestine, acts of terror.
But if numbers grow:
In Europe, where Muslims make for much larger minorities, open violence is common. But because they are still a vulnerable minority, Islamic violence is always placed in the context of “grievances,” a word that pacifies Westerners.
With an approximate 10% Muslim population, London’s butcherers acted brazenly, yes, but they still invoked grievances. Standing with bloodied hands, the murderer declared: “We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone…. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying by British soldiers every day.”
Days later in Stockholm, which also has a large Muslim minority, masked rioters destroyed 100 cars and property. The grievance for this particular outbreak was that police earlier shot a(nother) machete-wielding “immigrant” in self-defense.
If numbers get even larger:
Grievances disappear when Muslims become at least 35-40% of a nation and feel capable of waging an all-out jihad, as in Nigeria, where the Muslim-majority north has been terrorizing Christians—bombing hundreds of churches and beheading hundreds of infidels.
Sudan was an earlier paradigm, when the Khartoum government slaughtered millions to cleanse Sudan of Christians and polytheists. Historically Christian-majority Lebanon plunged into a deadly civil war as the Muslim population grew.
Once Muslims become the majority, the violence ironically wanes, but that’s because there are fewer infidels to persecute. And what infidels remain lead paranoid, low-key existences—as dhimmis—always careful to “know their place.”
When Muslims dominate:
With an 85% Muslim majority, Egypt is increasingly representative of this paradigm. Christian Copts are under attack, but not in an all-out jihad. Rather, under the Muslim Brotherhood their oppression is becoming institutionalized, including through new “blasphemy” laws which have seen many Christians attacked and imprisoned.
Attacks on infidels finally end when Muslims become 100% of the population, as in Saudi Arabia—where all its citizens are Muslim, and churches and other non-Islamic expressions are totally banned.
Such is the rule of numbers, Islam style.
What does Yaron Brook have to say about this? Or "throw-the-borders-open" Harry? Dr. Diana? Craig Biddle? Dan "I defend Islam" Edge?
Is this just Conservative silliness? Is it "flawed epistemology"? Maybe its "deterministic"? You know just because you are a Muslim doesn't mean you're a jihadist? Maybe we should just focus on the economy? Yeah, that's the ticket.
When organized Objectivism has the guts to address the subject of Muslim immigration, it will be worthy of respect as an intellectual movement. As of now, it is sterile and impotent. And Rand is spinning in her grave.