Among all the many and various ways the Cultural Marxist establishment is trying to destroy the country and the West, the most curious might be that of Islamic immigration. In the liberal left we have a political movement that decries all manner of ‘-isms’ and apparent injustices and (many but certainly not all) forms of discrimination, and yet is perfectly content with the importation of a culture that is notoriously homophobic, misogynistic and anti-Semitic. At the very least it, like most religions, is thoroughly ‘small-c’ conservative.
Sure, they’ll point out that not all Muslims think this way, though the ‘not all’ suggests there is a threshold under which it’s OK that x% of the faithful are happy to throw gay people off tall buildings or beat their women, which could be the basis of an entertaining conversation with a ‘liberal’.
However, it’s clear that they are largely fine with the inherent spreading of such views, occasionally comforting themselves with the existence of ‘good’ Muslims – such as the minority Ahmediyya sect – who at least appear more moderate and thus don’t embarrass the collaborators.
So, why Islam? Why this particular religion?
To cite some lazy stereotypes, Buddhists have their reputation for being chill. There’s Hindus and the like who, maybe depending on caste, are known for producing businessmen, doctors and lawyers. There’s Sikhs, who of course have had their own run-ins with the religion of peace in their history, and tend to have a favourable reputation for getting involved in positive ways in their host countries. Granted, we know that Christianity is out, and that the Left also don’t have much care for Jews.
I think the question when it comes to the Marxists’ Islamaphilia is not ‘why’ but ‘why not’? Here is a philosophy that is ready and keen to aggressively spread its influence across naïve and complacent host nations, which tends to be inherently anti-western and particularly anti-American (and their pesky friends in Israel). Islam provides a ready-made force to aid in dismantling just about everything that made the West great. And that is the common purpose of Islam and Cultural Marxism, as much as there is one.
To the Cultural Marxist – as to the traditional sort – the actual objective of the revolution is secondary to the struggle itself. Indeed the real objective has been largely forgotten, other than vague notions of ‘equality’ or some such. The revolution is a political Rube Goldberg machine in that it’s the process itself that’s its main purpose even if it achieves very little. Almost a sport, the playing of the game is more important than the result. The destruction of the old bourgeois institutions, societies and structures continues – originally necessary in order for the revolution to finally take root – but few of those involved remember any of that. It advances the revolution because that’s what revolutions do, they revolve.
There’s a reason so many progressives will blather on about not ‘achieving’ social justice but ‘working towards’ it. They cannot define any of it in terms that can be measured and thus ultimately be declared ‘achieved’. DEI (as with Climate Change) is just a tool, and so the fact that Islam directly contradicts so much of the DEI agenda is not actually that important – just as the trans agenda contradicting key elements of traditional feminism hasn’t stopped its advance either (at least until recently). Even within DEI, the ‘equality’ bit gave way to ‘equity’ as the finishing line had to be moved further away lest anything resembling real ‘equality’ (of opportunity) was actually achieved. In some organisations now, even the ‘E’ is being dropped.
Maybe we can encapsulate it thus:
Q: “What is the revolution for?”
A: “Yes.”
© text & images Genghis Tebbit 2025
