The Numbers against Islam
©October 7, 2014, All Rights Reserved
“No more than ten percent of all Muslims are radicalized.”Common liberal sentiment.
I will not jump into the recent Bill Maher and Ben Affleck debate regarding Islam, other than to say that I am growing tired of the “not all Muslims are bad” disclaimer. Of course, only a fool would declare that all members of a particular group are evil. That said, perhaps we should discuss some numbers and see how they compare vis a vis the radicalized Muslim debate. For starters, let us begin with the base number of global Muslims.
According to the Adherents.com Website, there are roughly 1.5 billion Muslims (Shiite, Sunni, etc.) in the world. If we take the almost routine declaration that “only” ten percent of all Muslims are radicalized, then we can argue that about 150,000,000 Muslims worldwide have become radicalized in some form. Now permit us to visit the last great global conflict: the Second World War (the presumption made that radical Islam represents a global movement). Japan, which dominated the Pacific region for most of the conflict, had approximately 9,100,000 people mobilized throughout the war, as did Italy. Nazi Germany, which thrust Europe upon its heels, mobilized approximately 17,900,000 individuals. The United States of America, which ultimately dominated both Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany (after soundly defeating Italy), mustered approximately 16,354,000 members of the armed forces. In contrast, the United Kingdom, the proverbial empire upon which the sun never set, only mobilized 5,896,000 personnel.
If we take the total number of fascists – remembering that not everyone was “diabolically evil” – the total number of Japanese, Germans, and Italians fighting against liberal democracies comes in at approximately 36,100,000 soldiers if my math remains correct. To repeat the numbers fighting against everyone else during the 1940s, we would only need to radicalize 2.4% of the global Muslim population. Now, allow us to consider another figure, one fully supported by academic research.
During his famous Yale University studies of the 1960s, Dr. Stanley Milgram proved that sixty-five percent (65%) of the human population “could be readily manipulated into inflicting a (seemingly) lethal electrical charge on a total stranger” and that these “subjects sincerely believed they were causing great physical pain, but despite their victim’s pitiful pleas for them to stop, 65 percent continued to obey orders…until…there could be little doubt that their victim was dead.” In other words, a simple researcher with a white lab coat and clipboard persuaded more than six out of ten people to torture unto death a completely innocent stranger.
If we return to our numbers, we can come to some startling considerations. If we take the 2.4% figure, we can say that 23,465,000 radicalized Muslims bear the capacity to kill us. If we take the oft-quoted figure of 10%, then we can assume that 97.5 million radicalized Muslims throughout the world are capable of killing us. That remains an extraordinary number, so let us retreat to the 2.4% figure (merely for sanity’s sake). If there were 1.5 billion tree huggers in the world, then we could fear that more than 23 million of them could also harm us. The same could be said for the 1.1 billion atheists, secularists, and other “non-religious” persons on the planet. Yet, I do not see videos of atheists beheading people for not separating Church and State or environmentalists blowing themselves up to save water. On the other hand, there are (at a minimum) hundreds of millions of Muslims upset at the West for supporting the world’s comparatively paltry 14 million Jews.
In the grander scheme of things, perhaps it is not the radical Islamists that represent the root problem. They remain very vocal about their intent to kill and maim the innocent. From Beirut to Africa to Bali and New York, London, and Madrid, they are not afraid to kill. Whether Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda, or the Islamic State, they are open about killing anyone who stands in their way. No, the real problem in the world rests with the silent Muslim ummah – the vast majority of adherents that remain on their hands when others are being blown up or beheaded.
Permit us now to shift to the conflict in Northern Ireland. At the height of its brutality, every Roman Catholic bishop in the circle condemned the IRA. The terrorist group was well aware of drawing the wrath of Catholic clergy. Why, then, are decent Muslim adherents and imams deathly silent on the destruction conducted on their behalf? Are they afraid (or ignorant of) to admit that, in Islam, Muhammad was “both Caesar and Christ” – meaning that there was no room for dissidence. Even the Jewish residents of Medina – imagine that, Jews living in Arabia – “no longer liked [his] warlike faith, which had once seemed so flatteringly kindred to their own.” Again, perhaps the Muslims of the 21st century – and their non-Muslim supporters – are blind to the fact that beheadings, assassinations, and faith-spread-by-the-sword began with Muhammad himself.
However one bothers to dissect the global Muslim community – mostly violent, mostly peaceful, or mostly “wishful thinkers” – the true numbers do not bode well for peace. One can only evaluate religion based upon the life and actions of the founder – not alleged followers. Those well versed in Islamic teachings (and reared within Muslim, Middle Eastern cultures) understand that “the mosque during the prophet Muhammad’s time was not just the place of worship…[but] also a place to store weapons and make military plans.” The founder of Islam remained extremely violent in the propagation of his faith. More so than even the narco-traffickers affecting Latin America today.
That there are a great many peaceful Muslims in the world today says more about them and, perhaps, Christian/Western influence than it does about the actions of Muhammad himself. Without violence and the prospect of marrying multiple wives, there is very little to suggest that Islam could have flourished alongside the Jewish and Christian heritage that Muhammad borrowed heavily from. In fact, it seems that the only way that Islam can compete within the world today is through silencing the competition or rewriting history – aspects more in common with fascism and communism than democracy. Perhaps this is why the numbers will always favor freedom and responsibility.
R.J. Godlewski (GOD LESS KEY) is the manager of Tactical Extractions, LLC, a threat resolution services company, and presently serves as the president of Roadsailor Security Corporation. He is a graduate of American Military University, holding an M.A. in Military Studies, Asymmetrical Warfare concentration and a B.A. in Intelligence Studies, Terrorism Studies concentration, both earned with academic honors. He further holds graduate and undergraduate certificates in Security Management and Explosive Ordnance Disposal, respectively. Mr. Godlewski is a veteran of both the U.S. Navy and U.S. Navy Reserve. His latest book, More Skills of the Assassin: Delving Deeper into Human Depravity (ISBN-13: 978-1502421807),is due to be released during October 2014.
 http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html, accessed October 2014.
 John Ellis, World War II: The Encyclopedia of Facts and Figures (Military Book Club, 1993), 228.
 Ibid., 227.
 Ibid., 228.
 Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society (New York: Back Bay Books, 2009), 141.
 http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html, accessed October 2014.
 Kevin Toolis, Rebel Hearts: Journeys within the IRA’s Soul (New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 1995), 235.
 Will Durant, The Age of Faith (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1950), 167.
 Ibid., 169.
 F.R.C. Bagley, trans. Twenty Three Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad by Ali Dashti, 1985. 76-77.
 Mark A. Gabriel, Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches about Christianity, Violence, and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad (Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 2002), 97-100.