The radical left and Islamist movements share a common enemy: Western civilization. Their alliance is growing, but history shows it won’t last
it’s an alliance between segments of the radical left and Islamist movements, united by their shared opposition to Western civilization.
While many leftists push for socialism, globalism and so-called equity, Islamists pursue religious supremacy and sharia law. Their end goals may differ, but their common adversary—Western capitalism, individualism and the Judeo-Christian foundations of the West—keeps them aligned.
Leftists critique capitalism, individualism, wealth inequality and nationalism, advocating instead for socialism, collectivism, equity and global governance. Islamists, meanwhile, adhere to a religious framework that promotes the expansion of Islamic governance. Despite these ideological differences, both groups have found common ground in opposing what they see as Western hegemony, particularly in the United States and Israel.
Islamists view the West through a historical lens of conflict and colonialism, citing past military defeats and foreign interventions. Some Islamist thinkers advocate for demographic and political influence as a means of spreading their ideology, though the extent to which this is a coordinated strategy remains debated.
Meanwhile, leftist critiques of the West often stem from a perspective that sees it as a force of systemic oppression, a viewpoint reinforced in many academic and activist circles.
Despite their differing long-term objectives, both factions find common cause in their hostility toward Israel. Islamists oppose Israel for religious and territorial reasons, while leftist movements frequently adopt the narrative that Israel is a colonial entity oppressing Palestinians.
This shared stance fuels movements like the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, Israel Apartheid Week, and efforts to impose anti-Israel policies in student governments and media. The strong U.S. alliance with Israel makes America a secondary target of this hostility.
This alignment has contributed to a rise in documented antisemitic incidents in North America, including university encampments, road blockades, harassment of Jewish students and attacks on Jewish institutions. Some reports from human rights organizations indicate a growing tolerance for open antisemitism within activist movements, particularly when framed as opposition to Zionism.
Authorities and university administrators often hesitate to take decisive action, concerned about political backlash or accusations of suppressing free speech. In many cases, campus officials appear more willing to accommodate pro-Hamas rhetoric than to protect Jewish students from harassment.
The groundwork for this movement has been laid over decades, particularly in academia. Marxist-inspired theories—postcolonialism, decolonization, radical race theory and gender studies—have reshaped humanities and social sciences, reinforcing a worldview that attributes global inequities to Western influence.
As a result, leftist academia and Islamist activism have increasingly aligned, creating an intellectual framework where criticism of the West, capitalism and Israel is mainstream, while dissenting voices are marginalized.
While this movement initially targeted Zionists, it has led to broader concerns about antisemitism. Many North American Jews, including those who are left-leaning and non-Zionist, still view Israel as a fundamental part of Jewish identity.
This reality often places them in conflict with Red-Green activists who conflate Jewish identity with political Zionism. Some extremist elements within the coalition have engaged in overtly antisemitic rhetoric, with documented cases of protesters chanting genocidal slogans and invoking Holocaust imagery.
I personally encountered the Red-Green coalition when leftist and Muslim student groups at my university condemned my academic work on Middle Eastern politics. They demanded my punishment for failing to conform to postcolonial dogma, but my university ultimately rejected their demands.
Many other academics, however, have faced cancellation under similar circumstances, as universities increasingly yield to ideological activism rather than uphold principles of free inquiry.
While Islamists and leftists are currently allied, history suggests this partnership is unstable. Ayatollah Khomeini’s rise to power in Iran was initially supported by revolutionary leftists, yet once he established the Islamic Republic, he purged and executed many of them.
The fundamental goals of each group remain incompatible: Islamists seek a return to religious governance under sharia, while leftists envision a utopian socialist order. Islam mandates religious supremacy, while leftism is a secular ideology that tolerates no ideological dissent.
Despite their differences, both factions embrace totalitarianism in different forms. Leftists attempt to transform education, media and governance through ideological control, while Islamists use political pressure, demographic shifts and, at times, violent extremism to assert influence.
Liberal democracies face increasing internal challenges as these movements seek to reshape foundational values.
Supporters of democracy, whether conservative or liberal, can no longer afford to passively observe. The erosion of Western culture and values is well underway. Recognizing this reality is only the first step—defending the principles of free societies requires active engagement.
Philip Carl Salzman is an emeritus professor of anthropology at McGill University, a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a writing fellow at the Middle East Forum, and a past president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East.