In today’s age of science and technology, machines can avail forthcoming weather and climate—some more reliable than others (minus the fear-instilling fluff). With all this technological advancement, it seems strange there isn’t an equivalent for forecasting Muslim immigration.
While they’re working at foreseeing Earth’s planetary climate a decade down the line (insane calculations), analyzing and forecasting US-immigration results would imaginatively not be so elaborate. To start, take the socio-political climate of pro-Muslim immigration nations minus countries that put a stop to it via their military—add in the hopeful thought of the US not enduring that chaos (not with legal foreigners at least).
A reliable immigration-forecast method entails a “tipping point” availing the number of Islamic people it would take to ensure the US would convert to their religion—10 or 65 percent (hmmm).
The Islamic faith spreads catalytically throughout the planet (a pandemic). It yields a lot of children, believers are proactive and (like a gang) good luck trying to get out after joining. Hypothetically (because no place condones this), there’s a high probability a nation would ultimately fall prey to Islam if it didn’t have enforced, immigration policies—give it hundreds of years.
To concretely contextualize this, look at the US and the majority of Europe. Take these areas then determine the rate and kind of immigration best suited for a nation (e.g., The United States). However, the tipping point is unknown, so how to arrive at an informed assessment?
Because it’s a hypothetical tool to forecast immigration effects, consider both pro-immigration and anti-immigration folks aligned but unaware of their corollaries. In this prototype, take away the superlatives in either group—i.e., no open-border globalists (left) or emphatic racists (right). For now, look at the safe, middle folks who are inclined to allow some immigration and simultaneously retaining pre-existent traditions. The question then is what’s the prudent quantity of Muslim immigration—and the dangerous number…? Why don’t we already have this in place?
Try this one on: 20-percent-Islamic population ensures the US will see (tack on 100+ years) a controlling, Islamic climate—without consideration to women and LGBTQ folks.
It’s hard to determine if 20 percent would be close to the aforementioned tipping point, but juxtapose that with the US being 10 percent homosexual—that smallable amount certainly affected our policies. More, the United States is intensely pro-Israel with Jewish folks accounting for less than two percent. While the amount is minimal, it’s seemingly the effort that’s truly effective. Muslims are more than proactive… (Think about that.)
Oddly, the immigration issue seems to favor those who are intensely opinionated. Apparently, they’re the ones possessing sensible thought. On one hand, there are the intolerable racists (but they have the sensible minds). Additionally, there’re the open-border globalists with their extremes of equal insanity (yet they, too, are considered sensible). Both sides loud enough to easily assess.
Last but certainly not least, we come to the median folks with apparently no sensible thought on the matter. Honestly, it’s balderdash to dispute the good and bad of Muslim immigration until there’s a finite tipping point (or when one is found). It could be said pro-immigration and anti-immigration folks both concur to not surpass said point. However, because neither seems to know that happy spot, both extremes are black balled.
Currently, we’re in a state of flux: both polarities are appalling and/or ignorant. Yet each claim their respective position to be solid and correct—going off their values (nobody else’s). The median folks (many of us fall into this category) are of a foolish stance due to us not knowing the tipping point’s proper position.