I will also note that while you may think it is the optimal strategy for implementing monogamy (which I disagree with); you still have the problem that the people who are willing to implement it are likely to be as unjust as Whabbi Muslims in general, and so you will also have a society with reduced free speech, ridiculously disproportionate punishments for other crimes, state-sponsored violence for trivial transgressions, these being used against US. So it is not a matter of moralfaggotry, but also realistic expediency with regards to self-protection, that the conditions for such policies being implemented are avoided. Because qualities are correlated within individuals and even moreso within groups, there is a correlation between not stoning women to death for adultery and things that are nice for us like freedom of speech; freedom of enterprise, commerce, association, and idea consumption; economic prosperity; moving through your own country in relative safety; having police that are not comprehensively corrupt in a way comparable to the mafia everywhere at all times; not having people disappear because the state wants them gone, etc.
And then you have the general problems with adopting "might makes right": incels aren't "mighty" and neither is Whabbi Islam in a global context. Incels make up far fewer than 1 percent of the male population; so any incels trying to push such unpopular policies against the will of the rest of the western world would be instantly, physically crushed by the same logic they use to implement the policy. Adopting "might makes right" as such a vast minority cohort may even be dangerous to the group adopting it.
Bear in mind that I am not angry about people experiencing Schadenfreude over the sight of a woman being executed, I am just arguing against the bringing of conditions under which such a policy could be implemented; from a purely self-serving standpoint.
