You've heard the term, "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in 3 generations." An equivalent can be said about civilizations. When a civilization begins, there is a clarity of purpose, and an adherence to logic, science and technology (at least to the extent it's known at the time). Consider the look and feel of all the ancient civilizations - China, India, Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, Meso-America. When one of these civilizations were conquered by another one, there was little or no devolution. But look at what happened when Rome fell; it was conquered by barbarians, and everything fell apart. It took 1,000 years to begin to recover. We're faced with that same dilemma today, being faced, not with a modern foe, but with a foe spouting 7th century ideas. If Islam overtakes the West, it will take at least 1,000 years to begin to recover, if ever. It will be another case of the barbarians overwhelming the civilized. Note that in each case, the barbarians want(ed) the goodies of the civilized culture, but they couldn't maintain it. That's exactly what will happen if Islam is victorious. There is nothing in that culture that will support a modern society. Everything that the Muslim countries have was purchased or stolen from the civilized culture; there is nothing within Islam that will promote innovation. In fact, innovation is one of the main things Islam is against. So, when you can look at a situation like this, and not discover what a village idiot could in 5 minutes, then you have an anomaly, something that deserves more scrutiny. Like Francisco, it's like tearing the lid off hell, because no one wants to identify the level of evil that encourages someone to support the ascendancy of the barbarian over the civilized. We know the incentives of the barbarians, viz., the looting of the civilized. The incentives of those in the civilized culture who want the barbarians to succeed is much, much worse than short term thinking. It's like Louis XIV saying "apres moi le deluge," ignoring the fact that Louis XV and Louis XVI would be caught up in that deluge, leading to the extinction of the royal line. There can be no compromise whatsoever with such thinking, because that brands you as an accessory to the demise of your own line. If that's the way one feels, jumping off the nearest building or bridge would be much cleaner.

I share your concern, and Straight Line Logic and my fiction are my attempts to prevent that outcome. It may seem ludicrous, but Ayn Rand used to say one mind at a time. If the battle for minds, one at a time, is not won, then the outcome we both fear is assured.

Thank you.

Thank you OA, and thank everyone for the excellent comments.

Thank you for spreading the word.

Thank you, Herb7734, and I'd accept your invitation if I was in your area, although I'm not sure you'd want to record my replies. The advantage of writing is that you can think as long as you want before you commit to paper (or computer screen) and you get to edit.