Malcolm and Simone Collins dive deep into one of the most paradoxical political alliances of our time: the surprising partnership between modern progressivism and Islamism.Why do groups that claim to champion LGBTQ+ rights, feminism, and secularism repeatedly align with a ideology that often rejects those very values? From the Iranian Revolution to "Queers for Palestine," this episode explores the ideological overlaps, cognitive dissonance, and shared strategic goals that make this alliance stronger than many realize.Topics include:• The "oppressor vs oppressed" framework• Treatment of homosexuality vs. gender transition in Muslim societies• Shared hostility toward Western civilization• Why suffering of "their side" is often irrelevant to both movements• Historical betrayals and future implicationsA sobering and unfiltered analysis of modern political bedfellows.

Episode Transcript

Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. I’m excited to be here with you today. Today we are going to be discussing Islam and the left, which have been bedfellows throughout recent history. Obviously they were very strong bedfellows during the Iranian revolution, which we will discuss how that ended up happening. And they all were then killed afterwards.

It was very much like the sheep siding with the wolves, only for the wolves to feast on the sheep as soon as they got what they wanted. B- pretty witless, and I think could be a sign of... Like, obviously there’s the famous picture of the two young progressive girls in a car cheering the rise of the new ayatollah, and both of...

One of them was killed by his regime, and the other one lived their life as a refugee.

And so, you know, not good for them historically when they’ve done this. But I wanted to better understand why and how these two things are compatible. And people can just say, “Well, they aren’t compatible, Malcolm,” and I’m like, surely [00:01:00] progressives don’t think that, right?

Like, surely progressives have looked into this and have some sort of thesis I just haven’t taken the time to understand. So what I did, and what, what I, what I wanted this piece to be, which unfortunately it can’t be, and I’ll explain why in just a second-

Simone Collins: Oh ...

Malcolm Collins: is I wanted to go through on some sort of, like, well-reasoned progressive piece on why Islamism and progressive values make such good bedfellows.

Simone Collins: Okay.

Malcolm Collins: And that we would go through this piece and I would explain, “Well, this doesn’t really work here,” or, “They actually have some points here.” And very, very interestingly I could not find any such piece.

Simone Collins: What? How... That seems

Malcolm Collins: implausible. Right? I assumed they must be out there everywhere, right?

Like, I was like, they must have, like, taken the time to, like, grok, digest, and explain this.

Simone Collins: Yes.

Malcolm Collins: Right? Because it seems like a contradiction, and there were a [00:02:00] lot of progressive pieces- Well,

Simone Collins: The Free Press tried to m- to make an explanation of this.

Malcolm Collins: No, they didn’t. No, they didn’t. What The Free Press did, ‘cause I read that article, that was one of the ones I read in preparation for this-

Simone Collins: Okay

Malcolm Collins: Is they tried to, they basically just said, “This happened before with the Islamic revolution,” and then they went over a few things from that. But that wasn’t, that didn’t really explain why the progressives thought this was okay.

Simone Collins: Okay, so you’re just talk- Yeah, I guess your, your argument is that isn’t an explanation, it’s only a history of the alliance.

It doesn’t explain the underlying reason for the alliance.

The, oh my God, when you move around your room, it sounds like your room is the Star Wars trash compactor. Like So

Malcolm Collins: so, I ended up running ahead and being like, “Okay, let’s see if I can find any of these,” right?

And what I did find, so I’ll go over what I did find a number of. I found, like, six or seven of these. And there appear to be near infinity more, is progressives muldering over the fact [00:03:00] that people thought that they were unaware that Muslims... Like, like making fun of them when, like, Netanyahu said that gays for Gaza is like KFC K- fried chicken, or chicken for KFC, right?

Like, and they, they really hate conservatives making fun of them for this. Huh. Okay ... being unaware that in these groups that they say they wanna help, they do want to kill gay people. Like, that’s in the Quran. You know, you stone somebody for being gay. That’s Sharia law, right? Like, this is part of their tradition.

Hmm. It happens regularly across these countries.

Speaker 2: What would happen to a gay couple in Gaza?

Speaker 3: Executed according to Islamic law. Islam doesn’t endorse gays. Islam doesn’t endorse homosexuality. Just like Canada doesn’t endorse a lot of things. So would you like to see Sharia law in Canada replace Canadian law? At some point, it will. . One day we can have a Muslim majority nation here in Canada.

Right In your face!

Malcolm Collins: And what those articles did, which was very frustrating to me because it didn’t provide a [00:04:00] logical explanation, they basically just said, “Netanyahu’s government has said homophobic things as well.” And that was obviously very unsatisfying for me because I was just like, well, I mean, yes, it’s a right-wing government, but, well, like, when you say said homophobic things, like he said he’s comfortable being called a homophobe, he doesn’t support pride marches, he doesn’t support you know, gay stuff being taught to kids.

He, That is not the same thing as having a government policy of murdering gay people, okay? But they’re sort of trying to equivocate the two. Or they will note that there have been some gay people who have been killed in Israel by members of the general public for bigoted reasons, right? And they seem to not be able to tell or assume that their audience won’t care that that’s different from something being carried out as a government policy.

Mm-hmm. E.g. just [00:05:00] random homophobes versus the government will kill you. I mean, they’re, they’re obviously very different, but the core thing that I basically realized is they see being mildly... And I guess this makes sense if you look at their wider actions. They see being mildly uncomfortable with gay people or uncomfortable with trans people or disagreeing with their ideology as equivalent to a government policy of institutionalized killing of gay and trans people.

But- But think about their actions and this makes sense. When they say that like, “Oh, Trump’s government’s going to get rid of me.” Like remember when Trump was elected and a bunch of gay people were like basically saying, “Oh, Trump, we’re gonna be eradicated now that Trump has come into power.” Trans people being like, “Trans people in the United States are gonna be mass genocided after this.”

They talked about this, like that this was something that was going to happen to them. And I think that we as conservatives were not listening to that. We heard it and we thought it was funny, [00:06:00] but we didn’t understand that actually in their minds these two things are functional equivalents. Slightly disagreeing with them and or saying, “I personally would not live this lifestyle,” and saying, “We’re gonna build a government policy of killing you.”

And that’s why they have reacted so harshly. That’s why they keep doing these assassination attempts and stuff like that, as I’ve explained in other videos, because they think that this mild disagreement is the same as murder.

Hmm. Hmm.

And then that justifies everything that comes out of this. But I wanna get into where these two things are surprisingly okay.

Like, why do Muslims keep siding with the left, right? Like, why, why do they appear to make good bedfellows? And at first I thought, well, maybe there’s some policies in Muslim texts, because I, I found a few articles arguing this. These were from Muslims trying to explain to progressives why they should be friendly with Muslims.

Oh. [00:07:00] And they went over Muslim teachings trying to argue that Muslim teachings are inherently socialist.

Simone Collins: Oh.

Malcolm Collins: This comes down to things like the zakat which is one of the five pillars, which means that you’re typically donate around 2.5% of wealth assets above a threshold to the poor, needy, debtors, or travelers.

This is... I mean, it is socialist-like, but Christians have just as many parts of the Bible that they could point to and say “This is socialist-like.” You also, Have sorry. So but then you can say, “Okay, well, if this was the case, can we look at the Gini coefficient of Muslim majority countries to see if it’s higher or lower than equivalent other countries?”

And Gini coefficients of Muslim countries are enormously higher than other countries. They are some of the-

Simone Collins: Famously so, yes ...

Malcolm Collins: yeah, some of the most unequal societies on earth. So then the question can be, okay, why do they... Because I don’t wanna ask, like, from a right-wing perspective how are these things the same.

Like, as right-wingers we can say [00:08:00] they’re both totalitarian in the way they attempt to approach things. T...