Islam’s growth as a social force across the West is a threat to the pillars of Western Civilization, said Gad Saad in a July-published discussion with Joe Rogan.

Both Saad and Rogan lamented the lack of an "honest conversation" within the popular culture about the impact of growing Muslim demographics across the West:

If you look at a long-term view of the issue of Islamic immigration; if what you focus on is — “Do we have the proper vetting processes to stop ISIS terrorists from getting in?” — that’s a very short-term view of the problem. But if you recognize that societies will take, often, a very long time before they become Islamized, it’s not as though every single country that today is Islamic became instantaneously overnight Islamic. In some cases it was a very quick invasion. In other cases it took five hundred years before the demographic realities shifted.

So, if you look at it from the perspective of ten, twenty, fifty, a hundred years, the US [faces] no threat. But take a long-term view, I love this quote, I think it was from the Taliban: “The United States have all the clocks and watches. We have all the time in the world.”

In other words, “Insha’Allah, eventually, God-willing, we will conquer you.”

Saad invited viewers to consider whether Islam is, on balance, a helpful, innocuous, or harmful ideology:

Do you wish to have a society become more Islamized or less? …

When Islam comes into a place, either the society gets better, nothing changes, or it gets worse. Do we have enough data at this point after fourteen hundred years to suggest that we can try to bet what will happen to a society? The answer, regrettably, is yes. Again, I hate to have to preface [my assessment with], of course most Muslims are lovely and peaceful and simply wish to raise their kids, but Islam as an ideology, when it comes into a new society, is it a good thing? If yes, then let’s all turn Islamic. If no, then maybe we should have an honest conversation about this.

Islamism and Islam cannot be separated from one another, said Saad. Those drawing a clear delineation between Islam and Islamism are offering a false sense of hope to others, he added:

Some people are now trying to draw a distinction between Islam and Islamism. … Islam has two elements, there’s the spiritual part — which is kind of like your Oktoberfest; pray this way and believe in [Allah], and so on — but then within Islam is a much larger component of politics; political Islam.

So when you say, “We should be attacking Islamism,” as if it’s something that is outside of Islam, that is simply false. Islamism is Islam.

[Turkish Prime Minister Tayyipe] Erdogan — and I can quote many other Islamic experts — said Islam is Islam. The term “moderate Islam,” “Islamism” and all these other qualifiers are nonsensical.

[Subscribing to incoherent delineations between Islam and Islamism] gives people a false sense of hope; “Islam is wonderful, but we need to attack this separate thing called Islamism.’” Well, from day one, fourteen hundred years ago, Islam was Islamism. …

There is no such thing as “radical Islam.” There are no books called “radical Islam.” There is a set of doctrines called Islam. …

Why should we tolerate this kind of stuff? Come in, my Muslim brothers, but keep out the stuff that you yourself escaped from out of our country. We don’t want it. … Why should I be tolerant toward the intolerable?

Rogan noted that conversations pertaining to Islam are often shut down by leftists and those who fear left-wing hostility. Racism, he added, is reflexively used by leftists to deride those who critique Islam.

Religious dogma, said Rogan, is “very problematic” in that it prohibits critical analysis of religiously-prescribed tenets.

Watch the discussion below (relevant portion begins at 10:37):

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter.