What is the Vital Nexus Between Progressives and Islam?

After puzzling for some time about the strong affinity between the Left and Muslims, [1] I think I have finally sorted it out.

The answer to the title question is a brief one, and for that reason, this promises to be a short essay.  It is simply this: the two groups share a culture of entitlement and a conviction of their own innate superiority, on the one hand, and of right of dominion on the other.  In a word, Progressives and Muslims have much in common.


Both groups have a deep sense that they are owed their livelihood and prosperity by others.  Why?  Because of who they are.

In the case of Progressives all persons who do not align themselves with the elitist [2] Left are inferior and must be led or forced into submission as occasion requires.  It is the mandate -- nay, the obligation, under the code of nobless oblige -- of Progressives to seize, through the instrument of government taxation, and distribute the wealth of "the other", the masses, the proletariat.  In doing so they can take a bit off the top.

Because they are followers the "One True God", Muslims similarly believe they are entitled to superior status and the right to dominate and levy taxes (jizya) on "the other" -- in this case, infidels.

Submission is a vital principle to both groups   Muslims must submit to Allah; Progressives must submit to liberal dogma.  Dhimmis are expected to submit to Muslims; the Right and the Center are expected to submit to Progressives.  Nothing remarkable -- it's how things are meant to be.

Neither group finds civil discourse congenial.  Name-calling is used by both to cut short debate. "Extreme Right-wing, racist, homophobe" usually begin the long Progressive litany.  For Muslims "Islamophobe" (also found in the Progressive play-book) usually does the trick.
If name-calling doesn't work, there is always intimidation and violence -- or the threat of it -- to fall back on.  Progressives rely on union thugs. [3]  Islamists prefer bombs.


Muslims have a religious obligation to lie (taqiyya) when it is in the interest of Islam.  For progressives the obligation (at least quasi-religious) is, in like manner, justified if it serves the ends of liberal dogma. 

Broadly speaking, neither group produces anything useful  [3] and both exacerbate almost every problem they try to solve.   And they are soul-mates in their contempt for empirically verifiable facts; facts are not relevant when the "greater truth" is already known.

Another distinguishing feature that Progressives shares with Islam is dogged perseverance in pursuit of unwholesome ends.  Healthcare reform (among many others) comes to mind.  "Hillary-care" didn't make the cut, being hugely unpopular with voters.  Not to worry.  Try again.  Morphing into "Obama-care", it remains hugely unpopular with voters.  This time they got it through the Congress, but, failing that, they would have used the courts.  If legislation won't pass (say, immigration reform), they turn to the courts, and if that doesn't work they simply break the law.
For about 14 Centuries Islam has been busy trying to conquer the world.  They had set-backs: being driven out of Spain after years of conquest; losing battles at -- Poitiers twice (732, 1256) and at twice Vienna (1529, 1683); and then (20th Century) came the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.  Not to worry, time to regroup.  They're still at it.

When people have so much in common they are likely to find a natural comity -- a nexus.  Wouldn't it be fascinating to see what would happen if the two groups were pitted against one another?  Makes for an interesting thought-experiment.

------------
1.  One has but to hear the outcries from Progressives in response to the Congressional hearings on Islam, chaired by NY Rep. Peter King.  Clearly, the Left has already added Muslims to their exhaustive list of protected classes.
2.  I make a distinction between elites and elitists.  The former are truly superior in one or more aspects of their lives, whereas the latter arrogate to themselves the illusory trappings of superiority -- especially in matters of intellect, wisdom and morality -- of the true elites.  Mediocrity is no bar to admission. 
3. The history of union violence is a long one.  The most recent incident I know of can be found here.
4. There are, of course, exceptions.  There are bright, productive and wealthy entrepreneurial people in both camps.  But the exceptions probe (a variant I like) the rule.  In contrast to the West and much of the Far East, Muslims (who, after all, for religious reasons, rejected the Enlightenment), have achieved little.  In Arab states the people are generally poor, uneducated and plagued by sectarian violence.  Likewise, the least productive, most violent and dysfunctional states, cities and towns sit squarely on the left side of the political spectrum.  Visit Detroit --  enjoy the fruit of utopian dreams.