The West’s Elite Are Selling Us Out To Islam

I saw a tweet on X the other day that alleged King Charles had quietly and secretly converted to Islam. I didn’t believe it, but when you understand that William and Kate have been visiting mosques, London has surrendered to Mayor Khan, and both the judiciary and law enforcement in the UK protect Muslims over Englishmen, it could be true.

I mean I just analyzed how Sir Keir now has a “Michigan Problem.”

A decade and a half ago when we lived in the UK, in Britania and across Europe, Christian churches were being shuttered, the pews sold off, and many of these empty sanctuaries were being converted to mosques.

The Pope seems to prefer praising Muslims and punishing Christians for not loving Islamists enough – of course, the current pope was a left-leaning progressive Catholic who also appears to have lost confidence in the very church he was elected to head. Maybe electing a progressive American Pope wasn’t such a good idea after all.

Add to that that alleged right wing figures like Tucker Carlson are pimping for Islam in America, Hassan Piker (who thinks Hamas is “1,000 times better than Jews”) is the new leftist “it” boy, the Woke right is aligning with Islam, and the picture begins to come into focus. The American left is all for secularism when they are not standing with Iran. Then they forget about it.

It appears to me that the global ruling class is picking sides. Around the world, powerful and influential figures are running toward Islam because they believe Judaism and Christianity are not strong enough to stand up to it and Islam will become the main social, political and theological force in the future, replacing Christianity and Judaism.

And given that Christianity has been hollowed out by its own leaders and members, they might be right. It plainly but shows up in posture, policy, and preference. It rests on a simple, if uncomfortable, premise: that Islam, as a civilizational force, is ascendant, while Judaism and Christianity, at least in their modern Western expressions, have reduced to comic book versions of themselves. Whether that premise is true is debatable but often what matters is not whether it is true or not but that many in positions of power appear to believe it and are adjusting accordingly.

For decades, Western elites have presided over the systematic softening of their own cultural foundations. Christianity, once a structuring force that shaped law, identity, and moral boundaries, has been reduced to a largely private exercise, often stripped of authority in the public square. Judaism, particularly in its Western liberal forms, has similarly been decoupled from hard power and collective defense, more associated with ethical tradition than civilizational assertion. In their place, the ruling class has elevated a framework of procedural liberalism, technocracy, and individual autonomy that, while comfortable and flexible, lacks the cohesion and confidence of a deeply rooted belief system.

Islam, by contrast, presents itself not merely as a religion but as a comprehensive way of life, one that unapologetically integrates the spiritual, legal, and political. It carries with it a sense of certainty, continuity, and demographic momentum that stands in stark contrast to the fragmentation of the West. Even where Islamic societies are divided internally, the underlying framework retains a level of seriousness about identity and authority that Western systems increasingly struggle to maintain. To elites trained to read long-term trends, that contrast is not lost.

The result is not necessarily open conversion or ideological alignment, but something more subtle and arguably more consequential. It is a pattern of deference, accommodation, and selective enforcement. Speech that would be tolerated, even celebrated, when directed at Christianity is often policed when it brushes up against Islam. Policies that aggressively dismantle Western norms are paired with a curious reluctance to challenge parallel or more rigid norms when they emerge from Islamic contexts. Immigration, integration, and multicultural frameworks are managed in ways that seem less concerned with assimilation and more with coexistence, even when that coexistence introduces tensions the system is ill-equipped to resolve.

This is not driven by admiration so much as by anticipation and a desire to stay on top. Power, especially at the highest levels, tends to align itself with what it believes will endure. If the governing assumption is that Western cultural frameworks are in decline while Islam is expanding, then the incentive is to avoid confrontation and, where possible, to build channels of compatibility. On might say it is simply a hedge rather than a surrender, but hedges have a way of becoming habits if they are used long enough.

Civilizations do have a long history of surprising both their critics and their stewards, so nothing is guaranteed. A cultural framework written off as exhausted can rediscover its spine, and one assumed to be ascendant can fracture under its own pressures, but the posture of the ruling class matters because it shapes the environment in which those outcomes unfold. If those at the top have already decided which way the wind is blowing, they may help ensure it blows that way.

At its core, perhaps this is less about Islam itself than about fear and a lack of confidence.

A ruling class that prizes survival but no longer believes in the durability of its own foundations will look elsewhere for stability, even if only subconsciously. Once that search begins, the center of gravity shifts, not with a dramatic collapse, but with a series of small, rational decisions that, taken together, amount to a civilizational bet.

The global elite certainly appears to be putting its money on Islam.