How many Muslims does it take to install Sharia in a country? Ten percent, according research shown in the article "Minority Rules: Scientists Discover Tipping Point for the Spread of Ideas." If everybody else is discussing among themselves whether we should save the whales, decrease government spending, or bomb a terrorism funding dictator, and can not agree on central values, ways and goals, the tail can wag the dog:
Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society. The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals.“When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority,” said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. “Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame." ...
To reach their conclusion, the scientists developed computer models of various types of social networks. One of the networks had each person connect to every other person in the network. The second model included certain individuals who were connected to a large number of people, making them opinion hubs or leaders. The final model gave every person in the model roughly the same number of connections. The initial state of each of the models was a sea of traditional-view holders. Each of these individuals held a view, but were also, importantly, open minded to other views.
Once the networks were built, the scientists then “sprinkled” in some true believers throughout each of the networks. These people were completely set in their views and unflappable in modifying those beliefs. As those true believers began to converse with those who held the traditional belief system, the tides gradually and then very abruptly began to shift.
That assumes that there is not 10% of the population that strongly oppose that idea.
Yes, but were the ideas of the unflappable 10% legal under American jurisprudence?
For all we know, they're dealing with fashion or whether it's called "pop" or "soda."
Most people wish they didn't have to pay taxes, far more than 10%, I'd bet. But it's the law to pay your taxes, and some 10% mob telling their friends and neighbors they don't pay taxes might not change the minds of those who don't want to do hard time.
They did not introduce the actions generated by that belief.
They did not introduce the legality nor the power of the police state to discourage the adoption of those beliefs through arrest for those who act on those beliefs when in discord with the law.
That's the beauty of academia, isn't it?
There was a madmad, who some 70 years ago wrote, "If you lie to people enough times, they will come to forget the truth and believe the lies". That madman was Adolf Hitler who led a whole nation into his madness and began WW2. One of the first things that allowed Hitler to excell was in his determination to surpress any other voices of opinion other than his very own. Today, we call it, "The Freedom of Speech". Hitler knew this and wrote it in Mein Kemph. It worked on a whole nation and I'm sure there had to be at least 10% in pre-WW2 Germany who disageed with Hitler and even could be considered conservatives for that time.
What those goofy scientists did get correct was the 10% would excellerate greatly because of today's power of the Internet.
What they did not put in their scientific report was, that, "If you do not learn from history, then you are doomed to repeat it". Do you think it could not happen to the US? You better think again! Remember, also Pearl Harbor. Before Pearl Harbor the US was "Neutral" and at peace while the rest of the world was at war. We were caught with our pants down. Will we, the US or any other nation remember history? Sharia is slowly creeping its' way into the American Constitution through the inorance and polictically correct leaders, while at the same time the US and the world is being shut-up from free thought. If you speak up, you are labeled a racist, Islamophod, an inciter of hate between peoples, etc, etc. Can't see the forest through the tres, right?
Wake up world! Pearl Harbor looms at every free nations backdoor.
From the article: "The researchers are now looking for partners within the social sciences and other fields to compare their computational models to historical examples."
Shouldn't they have checked for social and historical validity before publishing this? Otherwise, it's just an ambiguous result that does not necessarily bear on anything in the real world. I don't want to dismiss this work entirely. It is indeed interesting, but there need to be some more realistic constraints.
"They are also looking to study how the percentage might change when input into a model where the society is polarized. Instead of simply holding one traditional view, the society would instead hold two opposing viewpoints. An example of this polarization would be Democrat versus Republican."
Good idea; that would address KirkB1's point, posted above.
"As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. “In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks.”"
Well, a small percentage in each case were relatively secular, but most want sharia. The various groups opposing the dictators in both Egypt and Tunisia were quite different, but most wanted sharia. That is a majority opinion (pro-sharia) toppling a minority ruling position (limited sharia), not a 10% minority managing to change a majority opinion.
It would be interesting to explicitly add constraints to the model that mimic elements of sharia that seem to make Islam dominant, and the current elements of host societies that make them vulnerable.
... used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion.
This is an important area of research. There has been speculation in here on the subject of the probable Moslem takeover process made by me and others for years. It's a complicated subject that must account not only for pubic opinion, but for judicial decision making.
*** 33:21 ***
The U.S. Constitution is the perfect design for guaranteed freedom. That's why it lies, splattered and tattered, beneath the rear wheels of the bus, thrown there by our ruling elites. First the enumerated, powers, then "emergency" decisions like Roe v Wade, and more recently Kelo v New London.
But these and other lawless decisions by craven judges (actual law school grads wearing actual black robes) are driven by public opinion, so the work by the research team at RPI is important.
The tipping point concept is a key. We have recently seen, without criticism, actual Yale Law Tool alum Hillary signing the OIC resolution, the black judge in NJ rendering his illegal ruling, the finding that 80% of "refugees" coming from Somalia are actually blood relatives of their putative legal immigrant relatives, the USDA blessing halal slaughter process, and so much more... one would think at this point we've seen it all.
*** 33:21 ***
And we're going to see a lot more. A whole lot more.
So, it's time to reflect on and take heart in the wisdom of a former president who had the insight and courage to, at a time of great crisis, utter these famous words:
Islam is a religion of peace.
He went to Yale, too. Plus Harvahd. This man was very geniusy. Steal is. But we lost him to the 8 yr limit. Lucky for us we have another double whammy Ivy League Man in the White House who succeeded him. Hope springs eternal. In the headlong Race to Sharia we lag the UK badly rat now, but there's still plenty of time to close the gap.
It is vital for all Western countries to continually make the case for the strict control of IMMIGRATION through the specific limitation of numbers and origins of immigrants.
At present, the immigration 'policies' of most Western countries towards immigration is very lax, and we are seeing the consequences.
As 'Jihadwatch' reported yesterday:
"Occupation without tanks or soldiers": 'No-go' zones for non-Muslims proliferating in Europe"
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/occupation-without-tanks-or-soldiers-no-go-zones-for-non-muslims-proliferating-in-europe.html
This would only be true in a country that doesn't have a constitution that separates church and state. When you don't, there is nothing stopping or restraining the 10%.
Well, that's it then, a very good reason to immediately stop all muslim immigration and muslim refugees.
Folks, be careful here: France certainly has a constitution separating church and state, and so does Belgium, Sweden ... and many other west-European proto-emirates. Islam is cheating, so why shouldn't it cheat a constitution?
It might seem harsh, but it is better to be paranoic than dead.
Do not despair.
This *also* suggests to me that so long as the number of *committed freedom-lovers and the Islamosavvy* in the West - and in other places, such as India - is about ten percent or can be raised to ten percent, then there is hope.
Read *this* article, folks.
http://pajamasmedia.com/ejectejecteject/2007/05/21/you-are-not-alone-part-1/
Scroll down through it till you get to where he starts talking about 'Remnant'.
Remnant is what we are seeing in the Netherlands, with Geert Wilders.
Remnant is what we are seeing in the UK, with apostate-from-Islam Patrick Sookhdeo's 'Operation Nehemiah' seeking to re-energise the church and reaffirm the basic principles of a free western society; and we are also seeing 'remnant', I believe, with the rise of the EDL.
'Remnant' is ACT for America and the FDI and the SIOA...and people talking to people in the churches and synagogues and other social networks.
And there is something else to think about: at present, in China, the percentage of the population that is Christian may be approaching that mysterious ten percent. And Chinese Christians are not nominal Christians; they *are* committed believers, they have to be, for it is much, much easier and safer NOT to be a Christian, in China.
Watch this space...
Great link, dda, thanks.
A very hopeful essay - yes, I think the EDL is part of the Remnant.