For example, in Islam, if a man and a woman are left alone with each other in a room, it is normal for many Muslims to assume that they have had sexual relations. The rational behind Islamic thinking is that it is the responsibility of society to remove the possibilities for temptations. The logic behind the modern, Judeo-Christian West is that society does bear some responsibility, but that ultimately, individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions. This is why democracy, in which the whole point is the possibility of individual choice, is so difficult to establish in Islamic countries, in which the thinking is to remove any possibilities of making a “wrong” choice. Muslims thus hate our freedom because it permits people to think and decide for themselves. The Muhammad cartoons affair is a good example of this. The protesting Muslims see countries as collective entities in which governments are to be held responsible for the acts of individual citizens. The concept that what matters in Western nations are individuals is alien to them.There are few people of any stature who dare venture such a bold assertion. Ali Sina, the Iranian ex-Muslim and founder of faithfreedom.org, is one of the few who do. Sina has consistently claimed that Islam is “a house of cards that will collapse if sufficiently pushed”, and that we may see the end of Islam within the next few decades. He has compared Islam both to Communism and Nazism, claiming that it will either collapse as the former or be crushed as the latter. These analogies are imperfect, and have rightly been criticized by some. Communism was a recent invention, and a European, materialist ideology not concerned with the hereafter. Islam carries 1400 years of history with it, and is deeply tied to the cultural identity of hundreds of millions of people in a way Communism or Nazism never were. However, Ali Sina may be on to something. I have earlier predicted that what we are witnessing now is an era no less crucial to Islam than the Protestant Reformation was to Christianity. The difference is that Islam may not be flexible enough to handle the challenge, and will disintegrate as a result. For instance, the entire foundation of Islam is based upon female subjugation and male dominance. The movement to grant equality to females will essentially destroy Islam. Islam is quite simply too rigid to survive in a modern world.
It is true that the West at the onset of the 21st century shows signs of weakness and lack of direction. However, it is likely that the USA in particular will retain its leading position for a very long time. Europe does have deeper lying problems, and considering its many Muslim immigrants may indeed face a turbulent and violent period. But even Europe is far from incapable of renewal in the longer run. Perhaps this Islamic threat is precisely the slap in the face we need to regenerate and regain our sense of purpose. It is also true that our status as the leading civilization is not given by nature. We will be challenged during this century, but not by Islam. Our contenders are not Muslims, but Asian non-Muslims, who display a dynamism far beyond anything the Ummah can produce. The total nonfossil fuel exports from the entire Arab world amount to less than the total exports of Finland, a tiny infidel country of only 5 million inhabitants. A United Nations report warns that a majority of Arab young people want to leave their homelands in favor of the West. Is that the hallmark of a culture at the brink of world dominance, Mr. Ramadan?
Besides oil, the only thing Islam has going for it is extremely high birth rates. This can be seen as an advantage as long as Muslims are allowed to dump this excess population in non-Muslim countries and dominate these through demographic jihad. If the non-Muslims should decide to curb Muslim immigration, even the high birth rates would turn into a curse. Islamic nations are already falling apart. At the time when the oil revenues run out for Muslims states, India and China may have had missions to the moon. The 21st century will not be an Islamic century. Most likely, it will continue with a Western lead. The alternative is some sort of power sharing between Western and Eastern infidels. The Islamic world, stripped of its oil revenues and no longer able to export its population growth to non-Muslims countries, will hardly be a blip on the radar screen.