Photo Credit: twitter free images
Logo of the twitter account for the European Union Delegation to the Palestinian Authority

In contemporary politics, the phrase “if you throw enough mud, sooner or later it will stick” is often invoked to describe the practice of relentlessly labelling opponents to discredit them. This tactic, used extensively by the political Left, has historically aimed to stifle debate on contentious issues like uncontrolled immigration, identity politics, and Islamic extremism. By branding dissenters as “Far Right”, “Right-Wing Extremists, “Racists” or as the Washington Post’s favorite ennemi du jour, these voices are often marginalized, sometimes leading to severe consequences such as de-platforming, frozen bank accounts, or even being jailed.

An alliance comprising the Left, Greens, Centre-Right establishment, and mainstream media in Europe has successfully silenced debate on these issues for years. The “Far Right” label is a constant in mainstream media headlines in both Europe and America. For instance, the New York Times, summarizing the recent EU election results, added “wreak havoc” to sensationalize what was after all a peaceful democratic outcome.


Until recently this had left the ordinary public hesitant and even fearful of associating with these topics. However, the strategy of mudslinging and intimidation is losing its effectiveness. As the issues become more pressing and tangible, people are increasingly ignoring these labels, prioritizing their own livelihoods and their way of life over the fear of being branded as “Far Right.”

This shift is evident in the growing public sentiment that questions the inconsistent application of these labels. For instance, if attributes like totalitarianism, supremacism, anti-gay, anti-women, and anti-Semitism define the Far Right, then why are Islamic extremists, who embody all these characteristics, not similarly labeled? This inconsistency has fueled a growing skepticism and resistance among the populace.

Today the ordinary European sees political Islam, not European nationalism, as the real “Far Right.” The violent jihadist ideology promotes anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-Semitic beliefs and the supremacy of one creed over all others with chants of “Allah is Greater [than your God]”. This is the real “Far Right” to the ordinary voter in the West, who sees the Left’s alliance with these forces as an existential threat to their way of life. For now, casting their vote against this unholy alliance is their weapon of survival.

Moreover, the rise of notable individuals from diverse backgrounds speaking out against these issues has complicated the Left’s labeling modus operandi. It is more challenging to brand people as “Far Right” when they have a proven track record of fighting racism and come from various ethnicities and sexual orientations. Figures like Tommy Robinson, despite being consistently vilified as the face of the Far Right, have garnered support across different communities, including Sikhs, Blacks, Jews, and Iranians in the UK. This was evident in the latest protest he organized against two-tier policing on June 1St, which was attended by tens of thousands from different ethnicities. The speakers on the stage also included those with non-British backgrounds.

Robinson’s case highlights the complexity of the situation. His warnings about Islamic extremism, once dismissed as extremist rhetoric, are now echoed by mainstream voices like Douglas Murray. Despite the heavy personal cost Robinson has paid for his views, his support base continues to grow, and his recent march attended by thousands against two-tier policing in London saw a diverse turnout, further challenging the mainstream narrative.

Across Europe, the younger generation is increasingly critical of uncontrolled migration, the rise of Islamic extremism, and the perceived futility of Net Zero environmental policies which they see as a serious threat to their future. These youth, inherently anti-establishment, view the establishment’s promotion of these issues as sinister and problematic. It is this very sentiment that contributed to a significant decline in Leftist support among Gen Z in countries with Left-leaning administrations.

In the UK, however, the Conservative Party’s failure to deliver on voter mandates has led to a different path amongst the young voters. The Conservative Party’s attempt to appeal to non-supporters who will never vote for them while alienating their base has created political disarray. This miscalculation stems from assessing public support through social media and protests, which do not necessarily reflect the majority’s views. Most people are more engaged in their personal lives than in political demonstrations or posting on Social Media.

Despite these trends, it is important to remain realistic. The results of the European Parliament Elections in 2024 indicate that the Centre-Right and Centre-Left establishment remain the dominant block. Drilling down further into the results also reveals further complexities. For example the swing away from the Far Left and the Greens is more prominent amongst the male Gen Z rather than the female.

While there is no massive surge to the so-called Far Right, there is a steady re-alignment away from the far Left, the Greens and establishment politics.

If the Left and Centre establishment wish to slow this trend, they must recognize that the efficacy of labelling their opponents as “Far Right” has largely diminished. So far, however, the Left in Europe, rather than respecting the electorate’s choice and re-evaluating their tactics, have resorted to unprecedented violence. In France, for example, violent protests by the Left have had a long precedence and have included chants of “Long Live Hamas” and “Death to Israel” as far back as 2014, in what Gatestone Institute referred to as “Paris’s Kristallnacht”.

This latest violence response to the EU elections results suggests the Left has not learned from the voter shift and is determined to push its agenda through more violence and intimidation, which will only alienate more ordinary citizens.

In conclusion, the mudslinging and intimidation tactics have outlived their usefulness. To foster genuine political discourse and address pressing issues, it is crucial to move beyond simplistic labels and engage in honest, substantive debate.

Politicians must be courageous enough to acknowledge that uncontrolled and unvetted migration is causing significant social problems. It is evident that rising Islamic radicalization poses an existential threat to Europe. The war in Gaza has been used as an excuse and as a catalyst to bring the Left and the Islamists together on the streets of Europe. These large protests have made the problem even more tangible to the ordinary citizens.

The first step in solving a problem is recognizing its existence. Only then can we hope to achieve a more balanced and effective political landscape that addresses pressing issues rather than sweeping them under the carpet.

{Reposted from IPT}

Share this article on WhatsApp:

Previous articleStorm Of The Century
Next articleEfrat, Emanuel Residents Arrested for Protesting Entry of Palestinian Authority Workers
The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) is a non-profit research group founded by Steven Emerson in 1995. It is recognized as the world's most comprehensive data center on radical Islamic terrorist groups.