Since the dawn of the world several different civilizations exist on the earth. Among the major ones we can name our Mediterranean civilization also referred to as simply "The West". Other great civilizations (not only demographically but also culturally and economically) are China and India. There are smaller ones as well, sometimes limited to just one nation, such as Jewish or Japanese civilization. In this essay, however, we are dealing with one of the greatest cultures. Whatever negative we write about it, and there will be quite a lot of it, won't change the fact that out of all others this is the oldest one. It was founded more than 6000 years ago on fertile plains of Mesopotamia, with the creation of the world's first agricultural system. That's how Middle Eastern civilization was born. It had passed through various stages of development, until around VII century it transformed itself by adopting a new, expensive religion - Islam. Since then it is being referred to as Islamic civilization or just Islam. This prompts analogy to Western world which also underwent a similar change just 300-400 years earlier, by converting to Christianity. But outside of these similarities, significant differences arose as well. Christianity spread peacefully, while the spread of Islam has always been marked by war, blood and screams of slaughtered people. There is nothing strange in it if we take into consideration that the creators and first followers of Muhammad were common, almost stereotypical criminals. They created an ideology of bandits for bandits which attracts a large number of criminals even today. In the history of Christianity there is just one known example of forcefully converting some nation to Christianity, while in Islam voluntary conversions are almost equally unheard of. Over time this difference strengthened and became even bigger, even today it is a duty of every Christian to love their enemies, even though not many Christians know about it. On the other hand, a duty of every Muslim is to kill as many enemies as they can, even though many Muslims don't know about it anymore. It was in the Middle Ages when Christianity created legal terms according to which nonbelievers and their countries have the same right to exist and function as Christian countries, whereas up to this day it is almost impossible to find a Muslim who recognizes Israel's right to exist. Of course it doesn't refer exclusively to Israel but that is the place where this difference is the most visible. In fact for a pious Muslim all non Islamic countries are just a battlefield (Dar Al Harb - literally "The house of war") and are illegal from Islamic law's point of view. All agreements and treaties signed with non Muslims are pre invalid and not only can but must be broken at the first opportunity. Deceiving, robbing, beating or killing an infidel dog is nothing to be ashamed of but the opposite - it is an act of piety. The fact that Muslims don't do this on a massive scale can be credited only to their belief that by trading with the unbelievers they can earn more than by just killing and pillaging them. But sometimes Islamic godliness prevails over their greed and the result is a few dozen or a few hundred dead people, when a crowd, angered by the fact that French restaurants serve pork and wine, rushes to kill whoever they can, often other fellow Muslims.
So it's not surprising that a civilization so heavily based on rabid hatred of everything that lives remains at the level of the Stone Age, being inferior not only to The West not only to China but also to India. Only two Islamic countries have economies advanced enough to export products a bit more sophisticated than dates, lemons or tourist services, and they are both situated on the border of Islam with other civilizations, Turkey - next to The West, Malaysia - next to China. Islam as a whole is albeit more prosperous than India but not than China, and if we removed oil income out of the equation, it would be at the bottom end. In the Shanghai Ranking which presents a list of 500 best universities in the world there are almost no universities from Muslim-majority countries and even if some manage to get to the list, they usually don't stay there for long. Among more than 500 recipients of Nobel Prize in science there are only two Muslims (and four Hindus) and they are considered traitors by their fellow countrymen. The grave of Abdus Salam in Pakistan was destroyed - an outcast like him doesn't deserve anything better. Among more than fifty winners of Fields Medal (the equivalent of Nobel Prize in Mathematics) there are no Muslims. We have to admit that as for 1.5 bln of people these are just amazing achievements.
If we add to this that if someone tries to get out of Islamic cesspool and start to breathe the air of freedom, then his merciful ex-fellows have to kill him, and they usually try very hard to do so, then the image of Islam becomes bright and clear. It's an ideology very similar to communism - it treats people like cattle and tries to bring them to such a state, and if it's impossible for some reason - it tries to destroy them in the most cruel way possible. And just like communism - being unable to coexist peacefully with any other civilization because they all, by the very fact of their existence, show that it is possible to live in a different way or just to live - Islam tries to export its totalitarian system all over the world, cruelly destroying all differences. Nowdays if there are "tribal wars", "ethnic cleansings" or just normal wars somewhere in the world, then almost always at least one side is Islamic. From Darfur to Bosnia, from Somalia to Philippines - Muslims wage their Jihad everywhere, murdering everyone who comes along. Jews, Christians of various denominations, Hindus, Animists, Buddhists - they all deserve death just because they exist. Language of modern political correctness tells us to blame "terrorists", reluctantly admitting that these terrorist are supported by almost all Muslims.
Amazing, though not surprising, is that something as disgusting as Islam, has found many enthusiastic defenders in the West. After all, communism, beside paid agents had also had its legion of useful idiots. Islam has them too. So every now and then we can read articles or books telling us how progressive Islam is, how culturally advanced, how moral and tolerant and generally how awesome it is. Just as was the case with communism, supporters of Islam somehow don't want to live in such a paradise and prefer to struggle in the rotten and corrupted West. Anyway, people who praise Islam are often exactly the same people who enthusiastically praised the joy of living in a commune. And in their propaganda they use exactly the same tricks they had been using to praise the USSR. While in the past all modern inventions were attributed to great soviet scientists, then now all major inventions - from thermodynamics to quantum mechanics - are being attributed to "great Arab thinkers and philosophers" of so called "Islamic Golden Age". Praising scientific achievements of modern Muslims would be too intrusive. But in "The Golden Age" their discoveries were certainly unbelievable. Maybe they even invented nuclear reactors and computers. Not to mentions many less known achievements such as "the formula for calculating the sum of fourth powers", described by one of Islam-loving websites which of course carefully avoids to demonstrate what's so fascinating about it and why it was such a landmark. We'll discuss the "Golden Age" later but as for now we must firmly state that these supposed Arab achievements of this period are just alleged, or at least definitely overrated. Just think:
1. Why didn't Arabs (enlightened thinkers, leaders of science, arts and crafts who invented even computers and nuclear reactors, great merchants trading all over the world) discover America? The route from Europe America hadn't changed from the 10th century (Islamic Spain) to 15th century (Christian Spain).
2. Why didn't Arabs (enlightened thinkers, leaders of science, arts and crafts who invented even computers and nuclear reactors, great astronomers before whom the skies had no secrets) create the heliocentric theory? Their technology was on par with that of Copernicus, weather conditions were a lot better and access to ancient Greek writings which discussed such theories (Aristarchus) was also much better than in Europe?
3. Why didn't Arabs (enlightened thinkers, leaders of science, arts and crafts who invented even computers and nuclear reactors, great merchants trading all over the world) use compass even though they were in contact with two civilizations (Europe and China) which knew it and used it successfully?
4. Why didn't Arabs (enlightened thinkers, leaders of science, arts and crafts who invented even computers and nuclear reactors, great writers and scholars) use printing even though they were in contact with two civilizations (Europe and China) which were familiar with this technology and used it? Printed press was introduced to the Muslim world in the... 19th century, at the time when The West was building railroads and steam engines, despite the fact that the Arabic alphabet is as is suitable for printing as Latin alphabet, but much more than the Chinese letters?
These "great" Muslims didn't develop any of the aforementioned things. It was because Islamic civilization even in its golden age simply wasn't as advanced as many islamophiles (and Muslims themselves) claim. Was it real?? How could it've developed in a culture so saturated with negative values?
"Islamic Golden Age" was real. But as every thing has to be compared with another thing - Islamic Golden Age may look golden only if we compare it with the poverty of Europe back then. Compared to China or India of that time it wasn't anything special. So the cause of Islam's relative advantage over Europe weren't extraordinary successes of Islam in the fields of science, technology and economy but... weakness of its enemy. Weakness resulting from incredibly low starting level experienced by Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. On the other hand Middle Eastern civilization retained its high level of development, worthy of the oldest civilization in the world. Additionally, the eastern part of the Roman Empire (later lost to Islam forever) passed through the crisis of III-VII centuries largely unharmed. And that's the surprisingly easy explanation of the Golden Age of Islam - Muslims conquered lands which were already highly advanced by the time of the conquest , much more than those where Christianity came into existence. At the start they got a powerful bonus that made them far richer than Europe. Yet they wrecked it completely. Islam just like communism proved to be unable to develop economically and was basically stuck in one place for centuries while the West was developing rapidly. The main occupation of the Muslims at that time was, however, the destruction of inherited infrastructure. Mesopotamian irrigation system, created by Summerians and expanded by all other civilizations in the region was almost completely ruined by Muslims. The most fertile soils in the world on so called "fertile crescent" where world's oldest agriculture developed were turned into the desert we know today. Levant's coast, one of the busiest ports in the world which retained this role during Assyrian, Chaldean, Persian, Roman and Byzantine rule (and even during the rule of Crusaders) was systematically and deliberately devastated by Muslim rulers. It's Islam itself and not natural causes that is responsible for this state of decay and we can see this by looking at that part of the Levant which is not ruled by Muslims. Just look at googlearth to see that the boundaries of greenery and desert in the Middle East correspond exactly to the borders of Israel. Egypt and North Africa, in Roman times granaries nursing greatest empire on the planet, today barely reach self-sufficiency in this regard. There are many such examples. Every country conquered by Islam at some point of time (be it India during Mughals' rule or Balkans during the rule of the Ottoman Empire) after a longer or shorter time, but almost inevitably, tumbled into the abyss of barbarism and misery and even after being liberated it had a long way to go. This trend hasn't changed in the 20th century, it was just masked by a stream of petrodollars earned by selling natural resources to more sophisticated countries. But sooner or later the oil reserves will deplete and then Islam will show its true face again. Islam simply does not have the capability to build anything new. It can only feed on what it was able to seize from others and - unsurprisingly - doesn't differ much from communism in this regard.
That is why Islam - again just like communism - must be aggressive. Often the question is asked, whether permanent jihad that Islam wages against all non-Muslims threatens other civilizations far more than just by suicide bombings of kindergartens, schools and buses full of children. Well, just look at the country which is the most popular target of Islamic fury - at Israel. Despite having to endure waves of brutal and incredibly bloody attacks the Israeli economy shows no signs of slowdown and the gap between Israel and its neighbors grows even bigger.
And what about The West? Is there a danger of islamization? I think there isn't. Islam has long since lost all of its softpower and now its expansion is based entirely on brute force and violence. If it was attractive to anyone besides bandits, thieves and fraudsters, it wouldn't have to kill everyone who dares to reject it. Thus, there is no danger of Westerners (with an exception of criminal elements) converting to Islam in massive numbers. Many people claim that Muslims reproduce at a faster rate than we so after some time they will outnumber the natives!
Such an approach to the problem, however, shows lack of knowledge of basic population and evolutionary processes. First - all ideologies are not based solely on genetic, "vertical" flow of information from parent to child but also on "horizontal" one, through the conscious acceptance or rejection. Thus, regardless of how many children are born in Muslim families, we can and even should convince them to be on our side. Western culture is at an exorbitantly higher level and is therefore much more attractive for any fair and normal human being. Of course, abandoning Islam requires some courage, consistency and determination, because even if one manages to avoid death at the hands of "merciful" ex-fellows, cessation of contact with the apostate's family is sure. Because of this only the most valuable individuals decide to leave Islam. As only social scums and individuals of questionable intelligence migrate to the other side, disparity between western and Islamic world, already large, becomes even bigger.
The second reason why Islam has no chance of conquering the West is closely related to the reason why it has become a great breeding ground for fanaticism, barbarism and genocide. In Christendom, from its inception to the present day, the most pious and devoted individuals have been excluded from reproduction. Ascetic monks have been living in celibacy since the dawn of Christianity, in the Middle Ages this was extended to non-monastic clergy as well. On the other hand the most secular individuals also don't achieve reproductive success because they see no reason to endure all the hardships of having children. There is therefore a certain level of piety, lying somewhere between these extremes, where reproductive success is maximal. We are therefore faced with the selection stabilizing the level of devotion at a moderate level, allowing only some oscillations around the equilibrium point. The 20th century for example was fiercely secular as compared to more conservative 19th century, which was in turn preceded by liberal 18th century and 17th century which was marked by the struggle of Reformation against Counterreformation. This stabilizing selection was somewhat disturbed by the abolition of celibacy in Protestant countries and therefore today the Protestant sects are the most fanatical factions of Christianity.
Islam is different. There piety level is directly correlated to the number of children. It is called directional selection which makes every new generation more savage and fanatical than the previous one. Muslims from 200-300 years ago would be labelled as traitors and apostates by the modern ones, and - consequently - murdered. But directional selection can't work forever. Sooner or later a trait will grow to such an extent that, instead of increasing fitness, it will decrease it. It can already be seen. Genes (or memes) that lead to such a level of fanaticism that their carriers blow themselves up at a young age are self-eliminating. Muslims already refuse to vaccinate their children with "zionist vaccines" or to use medical services offered by "western imperialists". Some even reject the most basic rules of hygiene, imposed on them by "Crusaders", and this trend will become common over time. Soon, therefore, infant mortality in Muslim families will increase dramatically, and the last signals from Gaza and Iraq indicate that this process has already begun and has already gained positive feedback characteristics. Fanatical Muslim women will be able to give birth even to twelve children out of whom only 3-4 will live long enough to reach maturity and out of those who survived 2 will blow themselves up in a bus or a library. Islamic birth rates will drop, maybe even below zero, and genes (or memes) of fanaticism will be swept away of the population. But before this happens, we will have to endure a long fight with suicide bombers and throat-slitters in the name of Allah. If it's a duty of every pious Muslim to blow themselves up with a bomb, then it's our responsibility to make sure that it happens. The more fanatical and rabid ragheads get, the quicker and more miserable their end will be.
Much is said and written about the allegedly inevitable collapse of the West. Maybe this will end up actually coming true. However, it seems that The West will be the second civilization to collapse.