.jfif)
This is not an attack on Muslims as a people. It is a condemnation of radical political Islam, an ideology that fuses religious absolutism with coercive power and treats Jews, Christians, and dissenting Muslims alike as legitimate targets. Precision matters and the facts demand it.
Antisemitism: The Oldest Hatred, Reborn
Antisemitism is not merely resurfacing; it is being normalized at scale.
Recent data removes any doubt. In 2024, over half of Jewish respondents in the United States reported personally experiencing antisemitism. Globally, recorded antisemitic incidents increased by several hundred percent between 2022 and 2024, with monitoring groups documenting sustained, daily incidents across Western campuses and public institutions well into 2025. In the United States, nearly 70 percent of religion-based hate crimes now target Jews, driven by a combination of far‑right ideologies and Islamist extremism.
Synagogues require armed guards. Jewish schools operate under threat. Students are harassed, doxxed, and assaulted in the name of “resistance.” Open calls for violence against Jews are tolerated so long as they are framed as activism. This is not a protest. It is collective punishment — the same moral logic that underpinned fascism and Nazism in the twentieth century.
History is unambiguous on this point: antisemitism is not a side effect of authoritarian movements; it is one of their defining features. Where antisemitism is excused, authoritarianism has already arrived — whether or not it announces itself by name.
Christian Persecution: The Ignored Emergency
While antisemitism dominates headlines only episodically, Christian persecution remains one of the most underreported human‑rights crises in the world.
In 2025, more than 380 million Christians globally faced high to extreme levels of persecution, an increase over the previous year. In Nigeria alone, thousands of Christians have been killed, with churches burned, clergy targeted, and entire communities displaced by militant Islamist groups. Across parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia, persecution is systematic, ideological, and often tolerated by weak or complicit states.
International monitoring consistently ranks countries such as North Korea, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya among the worst offenders, while sub‑Saharan Africa has seen the sharpest escalation in violence. Yet Western political and media attention remains sporadic at best.
Silence in the face of this reality is not neutrality — it is abandonment.
At the same time, Christian persecution has reached levels unseen in modern history. Churches are burned, congregations attacked, clergy murdered or imprisoned, often with little more than passing notice in Western capitals.
In many regions, the perpetrators are not “random extremists” but organized actors motivated by jihadist doctrine or militant Islamist movements that reject pluralism entirely. These crimes are systematic, ideological, and intentional.
The silence surrounding this reality is not neutrality — it is abandonment.
Extremism Is Not a Culture — It Is an Ideology
It must be stated clearly: Islamism is not Islam. Millions of Muslims live peacefully, value freedom, and are themselves victims of the same extremists who terrorize Jews and Christians. Pretending otherwise is not enlightened — it is lazy and dangerous.
But refusing to confront Islamist extremism out of fear of being labelled “intolerant” is an abdication of leadership. Democracies are not required to tolerate ideologies that seek their destruction, nor movements that sanctify violence and religious supremacy.
Tolerance is not self-erasure.
Political Failure in the West
This crisis did not emerge in a vacuum. It has been compounded by bipartisan political cowardice and by a growing refusal to confront uncomfortable historical and ideological realities.
Allowing the charge of “Islamophobia” to shut down honest discussion is not tolerance, it is intellectual surrender. The historical record is clear: Islamic expansion was frequently driven by conquest, coercion, and bloodshed. Acknowledging this is not bigotry; it is history. Pretending otherwise, or attempting to repackage that legacy as purely peaceful spiritual diffusion, is historical revisionism that convinces no serious scholar and insults public intelligence.
Yet modern Western politics increasingly operates on optics rather than truth. Empty gestures, carefully worded statements, and symbolic condemnations do nothing to alter ideological trajectories rooted in more than fourteen centuries of precedent. They are designed to manage polling numbers, not defend democratic principles.
In Canada and elsewhere, political leaders speak eloquently about diversity while failing to protect free expression, secular governance, and the rights of women and minorities, the very values that distinguish liberal democracy from the ideologies that reject it. Appeasement is repackaged as virtue; silence is reframed as sensitivity.
This failure crosses party lines:
Elements of the Democratic Party have minimized antisemitism when it conflicts with activist coalitions, reframing religious hatred as contextual or understandable.
Segments of the Republican Party have addressed the issue selectively, using it rhetorically without consistent moral clarity or sustained policy enforcement.
Ignoring patterns, historical or contemporary, in the name of what has become diversity theatre is not compassion. It is negligence.
The result is a vacuum where hatred flourishes and victims are told, implicitly or explicitly, to endure it quietly.
A Line Must Be Drawn
A free society cannot survive if it:
Treats antisemitism as conditional
Ignores Christian persecution because it occurs “elsewhere”
Excuses religious violence when it is politically inconvenient
Confuses moral clarity with bigotry
Defending religious freedom is not a partisan act. It is a civilizational obligation.
Governments must enforce laws against incitement and violence without apology. Institutions must stop sanitizing hate with euphemisms. Political leaders must name extremist ideology — not communities — as the enemy it is.
The Choice
The question before the West is not whether it values diversity, tolerance, or inclusion. The question is whether it still possesses the courage to defend them.
History will not judge us by our slogans, but by whether we were willing to confront hatred when it wore a fashionable mask.
Silence is no longer an option. The line has already been crossed.
The only question left is whether democracies are willing to draw one of their own.
.jfif)
.jfif)