Europe and the West are exposed to relentless activities of subversion, driven by the ideology of Islamists. This encompasses not just terror and violence but primarily the so-called legalistic Islam, which employs the tactics of the “long march through the institutions,” borrowed from the 1968 movement. This poses a threat to the West, destabilizing our society.
Legalistic Islam, represented by movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Milli Görüs, and others, is particularly successful because it ruthlessly exploits time, discontented population groups, technology, and Western constitutional and legal systems. Its declared goal is to destroy the ideas and structures of Western societies. This threat comes from Muslims who adhere to the political agenda of Islamism: a theocratic agenda aiming to replace our current liberal, secular order with an alternative system based on Islamic law. It is important to note that these extremists are not representative of the majority of believers. However, they are expanding their influence even among those who have not been open to radicalism.
It is a misconception to claim that Europe and the West have defeated the terrorists. Instead, Islamists have adapted: the current Islamists have simply changed their methods to subversion within their host countries. They now preach to their followers to work within and through the system. “Convert one person at a time; bring Sharia to one community at a time. Win one election at a time. Change and conquer one institution at a time, completely legally, without firing a single shot. Large, spectacular attacks were not the best way. Perhaps this is the right one,” goes their message.
Islamists have successfully embedded themselves in mosques, activist groups, educational institutions, and social networks, flooding the environment with pro-Islamist content. This has gradually led to various parts of society being inclined to support Islamist political goals. The most evident example of this is the dramatic shift in public opinion towards Israel among the younger generation. No other issue of our time has seen such a rapid radical turnaround.
Some scholars rightly argue that the rise and spread of legalistic Islam must be seen in the context of the West’s decline. Islamist ideas can only thrive in a society too weak to defend itself. They confront a discontented population, mostly young men ripe for radicalization. This can either be the native population feeling alienated from their roots or immigrants from developing countries struggling to integrate. The friction these groups feel with the rest of society makes them prime candidates.
In affluent societies with extensive welfare states, immigrants find themselves in a situation where they can live off social assistance without any incentive to participate in the workforce. Simultaneously, it becomes increasingly difficult to start families, resulting in a high proportion of single young men among immigrants. In many European countries, the proportion of men aged 25 to 44 is increasing, solely due to immigration. Among the 20- to 24-year-olds, there are already 110 men for every 100 women.
While the alienated native population may find meaning in wokeness or other para-religious movements, young immigrant men—alienated, angry, idle, and frustrated—turn to mosques and radicalize. Sometimes, these different groups interact. For example, during recent protests, “Queers for Palestine” banners were held up alongside chants of “From the river to the sea,” until a self-proclaimed Islamist intervened and tore them down.
Such a society has sown the seeds of its own destruction. Wokeism, in particular, is a contentless pseudo-religion, and the Islamist knows this well. Many converts to Islam were previously followers of wokeness. When they find themselves predictably mentally and morally empty, the Islamist is there to invite them into the warm embrace of the Muslim ummah.
Leading politicians in open societies have overlooked that the advanced economies of the West have few to no socio-economic and socio-cultural mechanisms to absorb a large number of men with low education from developing countries or broken societies. Their former lives do not know the same institutions, culture, and morals as the West.
It is irresponsible to assume that everyone who migrates to the West will fully adapt to our way of life simply because they come here voluntarily. This was true when large numbers of people fled wars and economic stagnation in Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Within one or two generations, they were fully assimilated. The same can be said for immigrants from Asia, Latin America, and parts of Africa, albeit over a longer period. However, Muslim immigrants often struggle to adapt. Even if they are economically successful, they face insurmountable cultural differences between Islam and the West. Of course, many Muslims manage to reconcile their faith with their new environment. But this is challenging, and unfortunately, a growing number of German, British, French, and other Western Muslims are turning to Islamists instead.
Modern information media such as social media and the internet have also been successfully infiltrated. Here, Islamists have employed subversion techniques with great success. The earliest and most evident example was the use of communication and social networks to isolate and radicalize individuals. With the increasing spread of social networks, Islamists have been able to inspire large segments of young users to sympathize with Islamism.
The most remarkable example is the rapid shift in young people’s attitudes towards the state of Israel, along with the resurgence of anti-Semitism in the same population and the compulsive reflex to blame the West for everything wrong in the world. In these media, we find an amplification of the indoctrination that took place in school or the mosque. These young people may not understand what they are saying or that they are being used. They may uncritically believe what they are told because it is exciting or gives them a sense of belonging to a movement fighting for justice. Few of them can explain why they believe there is genocide occurring in Gaza. Social networks are the most effective tool for manipulating the masses ever invented. We are in the process of losing the next generation to subversion.
Western tolerance and openness, anchored in Europe’s constitutional and legal frameworks, are increasingly becoming a gateway for groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. A tolerance of the West towards intolerance. Islamists have managed to use legal institutions against their enemies. In many cases, they only need to invoke Islamophobia, and any obstacles in their way disappear. The fear of a discrimination lawsuit is enough to scare almost any person or organization away. The tactic of the Islamophobia argument is so dangerous because even attempting to investigate this issue is considered Islamophobic. There is no way to explore the boundaries of what constitutes Islamophobia. Just the accusation is a death sentence in some circles.
France is striving to shield its legal structures from subversive Islamist influence. Recently, French President Emmanuel Macron announced an “uncompromising” campaign to ban the abaya—the black full-body garment worn by Muslim women—in schools nationwide. This move is part of a broader program to curb the Islamist threat in the country and promote assimilation. In 2017, France enacted a comprehensive anti-terror law allowing police to close mosques or other prayer sites if preachers promote radicalism. In 2011, France also banned face veiling with a niqab, the first such ban in Europe. These measures align with the concept of “Laïcité,” a tradition not found in other Western countries, where the principles of religious freedom hold maximum importance. But even for France, there are fears that these efforts are too little, too late. Islamization through demographic change will outpace any top-down campaign to stop it.
In summary, we can recognize the outlines of the Islamist strategy of subversion. The absurdly high level of uncontrolled immigration has allowed Islamists to establish themselves in Western societies almost without filtering by immigration authorities. The conditions in the host country are such that assimilation can be avoided, while dissatisfied young men in their communities are gradually radicalized. Islamists infiltrate every institution and organization, disguising themselves with the language and heritage of historical civil rights movements. Whenever they face objections to their activities, they can effectively use the host country’s laws against it and to their own advantage.
The window to combat the Islamist threat posed by movements like the Muslim Brotherhood or Milli Görüs is becoming alarmingly small. Many European countries are moving in a direction where vehement disagreements are either suppressed or formally prohibited. In most European countries, there is now a system of censorship. Scotland, a country internationally known for its free spirit, has just joined this group by enacting a new hate crime law aimed at combating “hate and prejudice”—two notoriously unclear and ambiguous terms. In Germany, Marie-Thérèse Kaiser, a politician from the AfD, used government statistics to argue against resettling more Afghan nationals in Germany. The rate of sexual offenders among Afghans in Germany is very high. Along with other migrants from countries like Turkey and Syria, they commit half of the group rapes—although they make up only 14 percent of the population. Kaiser did not fabricate these numbers; they come from the federal government. Nevertheless, the politician, whose political views are also extremist—the AfD is a far-right party—was twice convicted under Germany’s hate speech law and fined several thousand euros.
In other Western countries, there are efforts to introduce similar regulations, though this currently remains a distant threat. Nevertheless, the direction is unmistakable: the Islamists are here, and they are winning.
All publishing rights and copyrights reserved to MENA Research Center.
