is there a desire by political elites to import islam into the west? well, i'm not going to claim i can answer that question. but, i can explore the topic a little.

now, remember: i'm an anarchist. so, the nihilistic way i'm perceiving of capitalism is entirely normal to me. i'll warn you of somewhat of a culture shock. interpret it academically, if you must. i think it's empirical, but interpret the evidence as you may.

if you were a banking elite in the west, you might want to analyze the question of how best to maximize return on your slaves. i know that we are supposed to have defeated feudalism, but the class analysis presented in marx almost seems like a cover - he never addresses the remnant feudal class, the existing landowners, the banking elite. they are supposed to disappear in the bourgeois revolution. yet, they did not ever truly relinquish control, they just disappeared from public view. if you want to be that much more cynical, you could argue that they delegated the role of public service to the private sector.

see, something is happening, though: mechanization and automation is ending the era of capitalism. this bourgeois layer is becoming obsolete. questions of maximizing return on slaves, held through debt, are once again at the forefront of the centralized planning establishments, which operate free of oversight in the private sector. this is the equivalent of a scattering of landholders, warring amongst themselves; it is truly a new feudalism.

the bonds have morphed. where the marks of ownership were once held in ideas like language, nationalism and race, the new feudal elite wants control through brand identification. this includes less expensive branding, like that done by clothing wear companies, and more expensive branding, like that done by academic institutions and mortgage brokers.

so, if we are to have a new feudalism, we are going to need a new system of mind control to go along with it. what is the best way to maximize return on slaves?

while traditionalists may expect the western banking elite to adopt the traditional form of control, christianity, the truth is that christianity's effectiveness in control has long been suspect. christianity teaches evangelism, which is inherently aggressive. a thoroughly christianized culture is consequently prone to internal divisions, as different factions spread the truth in different ways, and come to quarrels with each other. christianity's track record is a lot of civil war. the argument has actually been advanced very convincingly over a long period, culminating in some pretty brutal attacks about a hundred years ago. even if christianity's empirical failings can be explained away, it is difficult to imagine how westerners could develop, at this point, a faith in something that they fundamentally know is false. it does not have credibility.

if the default return to christianity is to be rejected, then what are the other options? buddhism is a hard fit to the west, and isn't much of a success story, either. atheism is out of the question. what about islam?

islam has been more successful in maintaining a stable system of control. perhaps this is because it teaches submission, rather than evangelism. i haven't done the math, but i could imagine that it may be seen as a preferable alternative to the bankers, who wish to design a new system to maximize return on their slaves.

this may sound crude, but it's been done all through history. one example is when the russian king adopted christianity and invited in greek missionaries to design a new society. the russian aristocracy adopted the christian model for social control. and, the society that they built still exists.

ok, maybe it happened in autocratic states in the past, but surely this can't happen in a democracy? chances are that your democracy has an immigration department. that immigration department has a large budget, and spends vast sums on understanding how to adjust the demographics of the country to maximize profit. this is the bourgeois layer. it exists. it is not fantasy.

i know of at least one example of a government using policy in this manner, and it is the canadian government's policy of settling refugees and non-european immigrants in quebec. the explicit purpose of this policy was to weaken the strength of the quebecois nation, under fears that it may seek independence. these refugees and non-european immigrants would not claim allegiance to a nationalist concept of quebec as white and francophone, and this would tip support to the federalists. it's not the same thing, of course, but it demonstrates a willingness of the bourgeois layer to manipulate populations for their benefactors.

i'm not saying that this is something that is happening. i'm just pointing out that it can be explained, if it is. there is an underlying logic to it. and, that's what gives a good conspiracy theory legs.