The Democratic Party candidate for Senate in Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed, habitually draws a false equivalency between Islam and other religions and treats the ethic of religious tolerance as a position of neutrality. Religious tolerance cannot be neutral about which ideology it tolerates, since not all religious systems adhere to the ethic of religious tolerance. El-Sayed’s propaganda line fails the basic test of religious liberty. And people are falling for it.
Islam is a religion. But it is more than this. It is a militant right-wing political ideology. The hallmarks of Islam are social authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, rejection of liberal democracy, and commitment to rigid social hierarchies. Islam is a system of intolerance. And it is profoundly antisemitic. What happened in France over the weekend was a return of Kristallnacht. Jewish businesses were targeted. Muslim businesses were left alone. I evoke Nazi terror deliberately; Islam is the modern-day instantiation of National Socialism. Indeed, Islam is the original Nazism.
El-Sayed’s response is not merely designed to deflect Tommy’s question (I checked, and Tommy is not a plant). The question does not merely presume that a Muslim would have loyalty to the Muslim Brotherhood; the premise of the question is the fact that El-Sayed’s family has ties to the terrorist organization. El-Sayed is trying to obscure that fact by making the premise about his Muslim faith, as if his faith doesn’t matter. The audience is supposed to believe that Tommy presumes El-Sayed is a terrorist sympathizer because he is a Muslim—and that it is wrong for Tommy to make such a presumption.
For readers unfamiliar with the Muslim Brotherhood, see my August 2026 article, The Final Solution: The Globalist Ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. The game being played here is the manufactured bigotry of Islamophobia. Islam is an ideology. All ideologies are legitimate targets of criticism. Muslims are the bearers of Islam. All bearers of an ideology are rightly subject to criticism. The Muslim Brotherhood exists to organize Muslims in a war against the West and secular governments in the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood appeals to religious liberty to insulate a political project from criticism and resistance. El-Sayed is openly advancing a propaganda line. This makes him part of the Islamization project.
* * *
The main fetish of the Islamization project is the Palestinian cause. The big lie is that Palestine is a nation that was colonized by the West, in particular European Jewry (see the URLs in the essay linked to above for my articles on the subject; see also History Matters, and On Matters of History, Israel Wins the Debate; The Myth of the Palestinian People and the Construction of Evil; Antisemitism Drives Anti-Israel Sentiment). Did you know Palestinian national identity is not even a hundred years old? However many decades Arab Muslims may have under their belt, the reality is that they made that shit up.
Before Arab Muslims claimed the label exclusively for themselves, all inhabitants of the territory were called “Palestinians.” Many descendants of these populations—Christians, Jews, and Arabs—now live in Israel, formally recognized as a nation-state by the international community. They live there as full Israeli citizens. Israel is one of history’s great success stories.
We are told that the Jews live on stolen land. The “stolen land” designation is not just a left-wing trope; Muslims are fond of the trope, as well. It presumes that the Jews colonized an already existing nation. But the truth is that Palestine has never been a nation in the modern sense. It was a Roman-named territory. In actuality, it is the homeland of the Jews, who lived there thousands of years before any Arabs. The people from which the name Palestine is derived, the Philistines, were not even a Semitic people. They were of Aegean origin. Both the Arabs and the Greeks before them colonized the land of the Jews. They are not indigenous to it.
Now the Arab Muslims seek to drive the Jews from their own lands. They have managed to convince a lot of people around the world that Arabs are the indigenous people of that land and that the Jews are the colonizers. This is an antisemitic lie. The corruption of popular consciousness is a spectacular propaganda achievement. Frankly, the Arab Muslims aren’t sophisticated enough to pull off such a feat. They got a lot of help from their friends, who are motivated to side with the Arabs because they share with Muslims a deep-seated loathing of the Jews.
The Jews are a generous and patient people. They should never have withdrawn from Gaza two decades ago. They should have annexed Gaza, as well as the West Bank, which is a network of Jewish cities and villages, and be done with it. This would have been good for those who now call themselves Palestinians. Had the Arabs living in those areas been assimilated along with the Arabs who became Israeli citizens when the Jewish state was established, they would be better off. Instead, they became pawns for those who loathe the presence of Jews in the region. That the surrounding Arab countries won’t take them more than suggests that Muslims want to keep them there to harass the Jews. After all, Hamas and Hezbollah are proxy armies funded and directed by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The international community could have helped by acknowledging that the Arab League is comprised of 22 member states, predominantly Muslim. Israel’s population is around 2 percent of the region. Its share of the land is only around 0.17 percent. The international community could then ask: Why is it so hard for Arabs to accept Jews living in their ancestral homeland? They would have to acknowledge that this is because Jew hatred is at the core of Islam. Why are world elites obscuring the genocidal desire of those who surround the Jews in the Middle East?
Israeli Jews are not suicidal. They are resisting the genocidal project. They responded to the October 7, 2023, attack with overwhelming military force. The next step is what conquerors do when winning a defensive war: annex the land they have subdued. At the very least, Israel should eliminate Hamas and de-Islamize the territory. This is what the West did with respect to Nazi Germany. The National Socialists were eradicated and Germany de-Nazified.
* * *
The majority of the Jews in America are not suicidal, either. Polls show Jews leaving the Democratic Party in droves. The reason for their exodus is obvious: Democrats have put Muslims before Jews in their desire for electoral power. They know that no governing party in Israel would ever switch its loyalty from Jews to Muslims. The
Democrats are shameless. Even though Jews still outnumber Muslims, the gap is narrowing, and Jews are more geographically concentrated in the Northeast, while Muslims are more evenly distributed across the country’s four major regions. Democrats have been welcoming Muslims into the United States and leveraging these ethnic enclaves to build constituencies in several major cities. Because Muslims constitute around two billion inhabitants on the planet, they represent a vast potential for expanding Democratic hegemony.
American Jews must recognize that the Republican Party is their only hope for marginalizing the Democrats and stemming the Islamization of America. For if or when Democrats become the majority in government, not only will Jews in America be unsafe, but the Jewish homeland in the Middle East will lose its most crucial ally. And Islamization is not just a problem for the Jews. It’s a problem for Christians. Muslims de-Christianize the territories they colonize. Muslims and their advocates tell us that not all Muslims are terrorists. True. But so what? That’s not the problem. The problem is that Islam, a militant political ideology, is a colonizing force.
If the United States does not end Muslim immigration, it is only a matter of time before the United States becomes another casualty of Islamic conquest. Look at what is happening in France. Muslims make up approximately 8–10 percent of France’s population. That’s all it takes to throw a nation into turmoil. Hopefully, the French will reclaim their country. Why should the US even risk the French experience? Why should we have to wonder whether Americans will defend their country from the onslaught of Muslim colonizers?
The Muslim population in the US is 1-2 percent, and it does not appear that they are willing to assimilate into American culture. This morning, I listened to a person insisting that Abdul El-Sayed, Michigan’s Democratic candidate for Senate, doesn’t need to assimilate. Why? Because he was born here. This admits what is so problematic about Islam: even when born in America, Muslims don’t embrace American norms and values.
* * *
In recent essays, I have appealed to Karl Popper’s identification of a problem with tolerance (see, e.g., Why the West Cannot Tolerate the Intolerable). If a people tolerate the intolerable, Popper warns, the intolerant will take command, and will cancel the value of tolerance. Popper insists that we should first meet the intolerable with argument and persuasion, because we are a tolerant people. But when the intolerant will not be persuaded, we know they intend not to embrace the culture of tolerance, but to overthrow it.
It is one thing for a Muslim to live in his enclave and refuse to assimilate into American culture. It is another thing altogether for the Muslim to obtain political office and use that position to transform American culture. The situation then moves from chauvinistic opinion to political action that seeks to encode chauvinism into law and policy. At this point, tolerance is no longer a useful value. It has become an instrument of self-destruction.
A man can be a Nazi. It’s a man’s right to believe what he will, however odious the belief. But he is not allowed to assume office and advocate for transforming society according to National Socialist law and policy. There is no obligation in a nation of free people to allow Nazis to enter their country and trust that they do not mean to remake it into a National Socialist one.
If 1-2 percent of a country’s population identifies as Nazis, it is time to worry about the peril of National Socialism. If Nazis establish enclaves in major US cities, it signals trouble, and a free people must prepare to respond to the threat. If Nazis run for office, then an outcry must go up. Those who defend the Nazi candidate betray their countrymen. They are asking patriots to tolerate the intolerable.
Jews are a very tolerant people. They allow Muslims to participate in Israeli politics. But they would never permit Muslims to achieve majority power in Israel. They know what that would mean for Israel. They know that the National Socialists used the electoral machinery to achieve power in Germany. Once Hitler had secured enough power in the Reichstag, he canceled democracy and established a dictatorship. The Nazis exploited an open system to close that system.
The Jews are also aware that Muslims were in league with the Nazis. The Nazis and the Muslims shared the same goal: the eradication of Jews. They also shared Hitler’s hostility towards Christianity. Baptized and raised Roman Catholic, Hitler was opposed to Christianity even while appealing to it to legitimize his rule. Christianity was permitted in Germany only so long as it did not hinder Hitler’s ambitions.
The reality is that, while Hitler was religious, he saw Christianity as incompatible with his worldview. He objected to Christianity’s emphasis on compassion, humility, and universal moral obligations. In other words, he rejected Christian ethics. Christian ethics conflicted with his racial ideology and Social Darwinist understanding of struggle. Christianity sees all men as equal in God’s eyes. Hitler’s worldview elevated the ethnic German to a position of superiority. All others were inferior, to either be eliminated or subordinated according to the providence that divinely ordained Hitler to manifest on Earth.
Elaborating on the nature of Hitler’s religious belief is a subject for another essay. It suffices to say here that it was not Christianity and, moreover, aligned with the Islamic rejection of Christian ethics and embrace of antisemitism. National Socialism and Islam are birds of a feather. Muslims carry forward Hitler’s project. The Jews recognize this. It is time for Christians to also come together around this understanding. The world didn’t lose millions of lives to the Nazi peril to become paralyzed in the face of the Islamic peril. History is a teacher, but the student must pay attention to its lessons.
And let’s be honest. Those who appeal to tolerance when defending Islam are not really tolerant. Quite the opposite. They do more than plug their ears when those who know history attempt to share its lessons. They rage against the teacher, smearing him as a bigot. They sometimes even resort to violence. They prove the charge against them. It is those who oppose Islamization who are the true defenders of tolerance. They’re the ones confronting the threats to a free and open society. It is the Muslims and their advocates who are the bigots.
