Islam and Leftism: A United Strategy to Destroy Western Freedoms (Video)

Hijra, in Islam, carries a powerful dual meaning, both of which contribute to the spread and entrenchment of Islamic rule. First, Hijra refers to the migration of Muslims to non-Islamic regions to spread Islam and ultimately establish Sharia (Islamic law). It’s a strategic move designed to grow Islamic influence where it does not yet exist. Second, Hijra also represents the deepening adherence to Islamic law within communities where Muslims already reside, pushing for visible and societal changes toward Sharia compliance.

A clear example of this can be observed in many cities around the world. You might remember a time when Muslim headscarves were rare, and then, seemingly overnight, every checkout girl at local shops began wearing them. This isn’t just a coincidence—it is a deliberate act of Hijra. Mosques often encourage this kind of visible Islamification of a neighborhood, coordinated to be implemented at a certain point. but it’s also something individuals are compelled to do to expand their Islamic presence.

In this interview, a highly respected former Islamic jurist, who once enforced Sharia law before converting to Christianity, discusses the concept of Hijra and other key aspects of Islam’s agenda. Drawing from years of firsthand experience in creating and implementing Sharia law, he provides undeniable evidence of the ongoing threat posed by these strategic efforts to expand Islam’s influence both globally and locally.

Islam also has a particular disdain for music, and there are numerous passages in canonical Islamic scripture condemning the making or enjoyment of music in general. Below is an example of how one imam in France was teaching music to French children in a video dated close to 2017. This shows how, even in Western nations, Islamic leaders push these strict interpretations onto non-Muslim communities.

In the following story, we see an interesting device at play—one that socialist governments in the West have been using for decades to gradually erode public and individual rights for collectivist and statist agendas as well.

Taliban Warn Uzbek Border Town: Stop the Music or Face Afghan Trader Ban

“Officials of Afghanistan’s Islamic fundamentalist Taliban administration have warned Uzbekistan that the music needs to stop in the city’s new Airitom Free Economic Zone (FEZ), or Afghans will be banned from traveling to the particular territory.

As things stand, Afghan citizens gain 15-day visa-free access to Airitom, a 36-hectare tax-free zone located not far from ‘Freedom Bridge,’ which spans the waters of the Amu-Darya river that forms the border between Afghanistan and Uzbekistan.

If the Taliban’s concerns over musical performances breaching their ‘morality laws’ cannot be resolved, the future of the Airitom FEZ could be imperiled.

Built at a cost of $70 million by private holding Afka, owned by Jahongir Artikkhodjayev, a business tycoon and former mayor of Tashkent, it boasts four large blocks where retailers can trade, a hospital, and even a Hilton hotel.

In late August, the Taliban introduced codified morality laws for their Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Regulations include a prohibition on playing music in vehicles, restrictions on transporting women without male guardians, and a ban on media outlets publishing images of living beings.”

In this instance, the Taliban leveraged business dealings with a neighboring state, making economic interaction conditional on an increase in Islamic adherence.

It’s worth noting that Uzbekistan, while a predominantly Muslim country, does not officially practice Sharia law. It remains a secular state with a legal system rooted in civil law, influenced by Soviet law and international norms. The Uzbek government strictly controls religious activities and emphasizes secularism in governance. Yet, in this instance, the Taliban has found a clever way to impose Sharia norms on a secular country as a condition for trade.

This tactic is much like how contemporary socialist governments, such as Canada and the United States, impose policies that defy basic rights onto the public as well.

For example, Pierre Trudeau, Justin Trudeau’s father, when the Prime Minister of Canada, implemented mandated bilingualism.

It was “mandated” because many nations have official multilingualism policies without measures to force it on the public or industry—often, one language is used administratively, while others serve ceremonial roles, with Singapore being an excellent example. They have 5 official languages, but officially operate in English.

It is important to note that Canada at the time was already quite socialist, particularly as the government had grown significantly under Pierre Trudeau. Most large companies depended, to varying degrees, on government contracts, so changes in conditions required to obtain these contracts had a substantial impact.

This legislated, forced change in Canadian culture mirrored other Trudeau policies, such as the enforced adoption of the metric system. At one point, citizens faced jail time for refusing to comply and continuing to use the weights and measurements long familiar to Canada and the U.S.

Also noteworthy is that forced bilingualism and metrification were early examples of the Canadian government unnecessarily dictating culture and erasing significant aspects of Canada’s history and heritage by government fiat.

In retrospect, it appears this legislation aimed to reshape Canadian identity, as both sets of laws offered minimal practical benefit.

Today in Canada and the USA, we see DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) measures treated in the same way.

• Affirmative Action: Companies with federal contracts over a certain threshold (currently $50,000) and 50 or more employees must comply with affirmative action requirements under Executive Order 11246. This includes developing a written affirmative action plan (AAP) to ensure they are actively working toward diversity based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin.
• Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP): The OFCCP monitors federal contractors to ensure they adhere to nondiscrimination and affirmative action rules and can take enforcement actions for violations. While the OFCCP does not enforce quotas, companies are expected to show good faith efforts toward promoting workplace diversity.
• Small and Disadvantaged Business Set-Asides: Federal procurement rules also include set-asides for small businesses, particularly those that are minority-owned, women-owned, veteran-owned, or disadvantaged, under programs like the 8(a) Business Development Program. While this doesn’t affect larger companies directly, it encourages diversity in government contracting.
• Recent Developments: In recent years, there has been increasing emphasis from various agencies and initiatives within the federal government to promote DEI in contracting. Although it remains largely non-mandatory in terms of quotas, the Biden administration has promoted initiatives aimed at boosting diversity in both the workforce and supply chains of government contractors.

Thus, through various punitive measures and incentives, where the state may refuse to engage in business with non-compliant companies and reward those aligning with anti-meritocratic principles, a slow erosion of freedom and equality before the law is underway. This is strikingly similar to Islam’s use of Hijra—refusing trade and relations unless others submit to Islamic rules and laws that are not their own.

And once again, we see no daylight between Islam and leftism, as both seek to obliterate the fundamental freedoms and belief in the sovereignty of the individual that defines Western Civilization.