In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.
The Babylon Bee recently published a headline that was both dark and revealing: “Groundbreaking New Study Finds Islamophobia May Be Partially Caused By Muslims Killing People All The Time.” Like most effective satire, the joke lands because it rests on an uncomfortable truth. While many Muslims are peaceful — some, such as the Uyghurs, are themselves victims of persecution — Islamic fundamentalism has fueled decades of relentless violence across the globe.
Those who embrace this strain of extremism pose a threat to anyone outside their faith. Unlike Christianity, which historically has sought converts through missionary work and persuasion, Islamist movements have often advanced their ideology through coercion and violence. Their ultimate ambition is not pluralism but dominance — the establishment of a single, global Islamic caliphate governed by uncompromising religious law.
As the world has watched atrocities committed in the name of Allah, many have struggled to understand how belief can so completely curdle into brutality. How does an ideology come to justify murder, intimidation, and the eradication of dissent?
The answer becomes clearer once we recognize a basic truth: Fanaticism follows patterns. And those patterns are not confined to religion — or to distant lands.
In recent years, we’ve witnessed a troubling escalation in violent, coercive, and absolutist behavior from the far Left. This radical element now exerts considerable influence over the Democratic Party and has increasingly set the party’s tone and tactics. In its pursuit of power and ideological dominance, this faction has moved well beyond the norms of democratic persuasion.
The most notable feature has been the party’s growing tolerance for intimidation and outright violence. In response to Elon Musk’s efforts to audit the federal government, activists turned to vandalism and intimidation: Tesla vehicles were damaged, owners were harassed, and dealerships were set on fire. In Chicago, protesters reportedly used their own cars to block an Immigration and Customs Enforcement vehicle, physically preventing federal agents from doing their jobs. In July, a group of left-wing extremists carried out an armed ambush at an ICE detention facility in Alvarado, Texas. Eleven suspects were charged with offenses that included attempted murder and terrorism-related crimes.
These incidents are not isolated. According to a Department of Homeland Security report released last month, assaults and acts of violence against ICE law enforcement officers have increased by more than 1,150% compared with the same period in 2024. When political movements begin to rationalize violence as a legitimate tool, they cross a dangerous threshold.
Nowhere is this extremism more apparent than in the Left’s response to immigration enforcement. After years of supporting policies that allowed millions of largely unvetted migrants into the country, Democratic leaders have gone to extraordinary lengths to resist deportation efforts under the Trump administration.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s (D-MD) highly publicized trip to El Salvador to fight for the release of “Maryland Dad” Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant and alleged MS-13 gang member, domestic abuser, and human trafficker incarcerated in the country’s CECOT megaprison, comes to mind. After a photo of Van Hollen gazing at Abrego Garcia with deep concern in his eyes went viral on social media, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) joked, “Find someone who looks at you the way Democrat senators look at illegal alien MS-13 gang members.”
If only Van Hollen had shown a fraction of that concern for the family of another constituent, Rachel Morin, a 37-year-old mother of five who was raped and killed at the hands of a depraved illegal immigrant during a 2023 jog on a Maryland hiking trail.
Sanctuary laws have only compounded the problem. Rather than notifying ICE, jurisdictions release criminal illegal immigrants back onto the streets. According to the New York Post, New York state alone has released nearly 7,000 of these people since President Donald Trump returned to office. This group includes “killers, sexual predators, and a maniac booted from the U.S. eight times who attacked an Ithaca cop with a machete.”
This is not compassion — it is ideological prioritization at the expense of public safety.
The same moral inversion appears abroad. Many Democrats have accused Israel of genocide while developing a strange new respect for Hamas, the terrorist group that murdered approximately 1,200 people and took 251 hostages on Oct. 7, 2023. Antisemitic rhetoric that once would have been politically disqualifying is now tolerated, even rationalized, as long as it aligns with progressive orthodoxy. Extremism, it seems, is not rejected so much as selectively excused.
This radicalism is not confined to street-level activism. To an unprecedented degree, Democrats have relied on sympathetic progressive judges to block or delay the Trump administration’s agenda. Nationwide injunctions and emergency rulings have become routine, effectively turning the federal judiciary into a veto point for executive action. Policies on immigration, regulation, and executive authority are stalled not through elections or legislation, but through coordinated legal challenges designed to run out the clock. This marks a clear shift away from democratic persuasion and toward institutional obstruction.
When the Democrats’ worst nightmare came to pass, Trump’s return to power, the party abandoned any remaining pretense of restraint. “By any means necessary” was no longer a slogan, but a strategy. Media disinformation campaigns, which used to be called propaganda, have been refined and weaponized. Routine executive actions were recast as existential threats, and political opponents were no longer debated but demonized.
Party members have offered no serious proposals aimed at improving the lives of the public. Instead, their energy is overwhelmingly focused on strategies designed to return the party to power. The small contingent of moderates that remains within the Democratic Party is increasingly yielding to its most radical elements, while tolerance for dissent has all but disappeared.
We recall the ghoulish celebrations that surfaced online following Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September, as well as the disturbing remarks from those who openly wished that attempted Trump assassin Thomas Crooks’s bullet had been just a little more accurate.
While such sentiments do not represent every Democrat, their visibility speaks volumes about a movement that has lost its moral bearings. When hatred replaces policy disagreement, you’re heading down a dark path.
At this point, the parallels to other forms of extremism become difficult to ignore. Islamic fundamentalists long ago recognized that Western societies could not be conquered through conventional military force. Instead, many turned to alternative strategies: migration, demographic pressure, and institutional infiltration. The goal remained the same — only the methods changed.
The left wing of today’s Democratic Party appears to have reached a similar conclusion. Persuasion has given way to coercion. Debate has yielded to dogma. Institutions meant to mediate disagreement are now weaponized to enforce conformity. Moral responsibility is discarded in favor of ideological purity.
This account barely scratches the surface of the resistance mounted against Trump’s presidency. In time, books will be written detailing the full scope of obstruction, sabotage, and institutional warfare deployed in the name of stopping him. But the lesson is already clear.
TRUMP MUST REJECT HOUSING SOCIALISM OR FACE BACKLASH AT THE BALLOT BOX
This is not dissent. It is fanaticism. And history suggests that when movements demand absolute submission, excuse violence, and justify any means in pursuit of power, they rarely stop on their own. Extremism wears many masks, but it always follows the same pattern.
Today’s Democratic Party has taken on the unmistakable contours of ideological extremism. And the question must be asked: Does anyone truly believe that, if these same leftists were handed weapons and unchecked power, their behavior would differ meaningfully from that of Islamic fundamentalists?
