Mamdami Demands U.S. Immigration Policy Start Obeying Islam
Mamdani invoked Islamic doctrine to define civic obligation and delegitimize lawful, constitutional authority.There has been a lot of panic, among the conservative commentariat especially, over the growing desire among younger white Americans to receive representation as a collective political bloc. At some level, that reaction is understandable. Race is not the healthiest fixation when it comes to identity.
But the way conservatives have responded to this trend is deeply misguided.
The only way to lower the salience of race is to stop importing ethnocentric cultures and to eliminate political carve-outs for minority communities already here.
For decades, whites have watched every other group in America successfully demand political action as a bloc from both the left and the right. Democrats build their entire coalition around racial grievance, but even conservatives regularly address the needs of minority communities as collective groups. Despite their hostility to “identity politics,” Republicans eagerly cater to it — just not for their core constituency, white Americans.
If conservatives genuinely worry about the rise of white identitarianism, they should stop lecturing young white Americans and start addressing the behavior of the communities they currently pander to.
First, it helps to define terms. “Race” and “ethnicity” are often treated as interchangeable, but they are not. Race is a broad macro category, while ethnicity operates at a more granular level. Swedes, Italians, Irish, and French are all considered white. Ethiopians, Nigerians, African Pygmies, and Somalis are all considered black.
These categories matter, but ethnos is often a more organic and useful way to understand group behavior.
Ironically ethnocentrism varies widely across populations and tends to be particularly low among white Europeans and their descendants. A society composed primarily of people of European extraction, even with some immigration, tends to be relatively tolerant and open. New arrivals who may initially carry ethnocentric instincts are less able to sustain them when they lack a large co-ethnic base.
Assimilation follows naturally under those conditions.
Identity is also not binary. It consists of nested loyalties that rise or fall in importance depending on scale. In small societies, tribe or ethnos dominates. As civilizations expand and absorb new members, identity shifts toward broader categories — often religion or nationality.
White Americans once lived in sharply defined ethnic enclaves. Irish, Italian, Dutch, and German neighborhoods were common. In some cases, the U.S. government actively broke up German-language communities, forcing children into English-speaking schools. Over time, those European ethnoses dissolved into a shared American identity.
That process breaks down when the government imports large, concentrated populations that share a common ethnicity and have not gone through the same scaling process. These groups face no incentive to abandon ethnocentrism because they can successfully deploy it. Co-ethnics ensure access to jobs, education, marriage, and community without assimilation.
In a system where one group must compete on pure individual merit while others are allowed to operate on collective ethnocentrism, tribalism wins. Once it proves effective, the salience of race explodes. When young whites see every other group using the winning strategy, the question becomes unavoidable: Why are we the only group forbidden from doing so?
The problem is not just that tribalism works. The system has been actively rigged against white males.
RELATED: How anti-fascism became the West’s civil religion

Jacob Savage’s recent article “The Lost Generation” detailed the extent to which universities, media institutions, and corporations have systematically excluded white men. The piece gained attention partly because it came from the left, but conservatives like Jeremy Carl and Heather Mac Donald have been warning about the same dynamics for years.
Whites — especially young white men — are barred from advocating as a group. At the same time, they are punished as a group. Telling them identity politics is immoral while allowing explicit anti-white discrimination guarantees a predictable response.
The conservative establishment’s answer has been a vague denunciation of ethnocentrism that somehow applies only to whites. Conservatives pay lip service to opposing identity politics while courting explicitly racial organizations. They speak seriously to black, Indian, Hispanic, and Jewish advocacy groups and treat their leaders as legitimate representatives.
Donald Trump recently hosted the American Hindu-Jewish Congress at Mar-a-Lago to discuss combating bigotry. You will not see a dinner honoring representatives of a “White American Congress” to discuss anti-white discrimination — despite overwhelming evidence that such bias is widespread.
That double standard is too obvious for young whites to ignore forever.
If conservatives were serious about halting the rise of collective white identity politics, they would stop scolding young whites for noticing reality. They would confront systemic bias in academia and corporate hiring. To its credit, the Trump administration has signaled an intent to act — but far more is required.
RELATED: Culture’s great subversion machine has broken down at last

A serious response would include an immigration moratorium and aggressive prosecution of ethnic cartels. And yes, every tech department staffed entirely by one ethnic group is not evidence that “there were no qualified white applicants.” Conservatives should lecture blacks, Indians, Hispanics, and Jews about ethnocentrism with the same intensity they reserve for whites.
If for no other reason, whites actually vote Republican. Most of the other groups do not.
If conservatives truly fear the rise of collective white politics, they should reduce the number of ethnocentric populations young whites are forced to compete against on pure merit. The only way to lower the salience of race is to stop importing ethnocentric cultures and to eliminate political carve-outs for minority communities already here.
In short, show young whites they can succeed without tribalism by actually punishing the tribalism practiced by everyone else. Summon the courage to confront the behavior you claim to fear — in the groups already practicing it.
On September 11, 2001, three New York firefighters raised an American flag above the wreckage of the World Trade Center. That moment was more than an image. It was a declaration that the country had buckled but not broken. That flag rallied millions, inspired enlistments, and stiffened a nation’s resolve mere hours after the most devastating attack in modern U.S. history.
In 2025, the opposite message is taking root in some of America’s cities. In Boise, Idaho, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, local leaders elevate symbolic banners that compete with, sidestep, or openly contradict the national and state standards that define shared civic space.
If we want unity, we must lead with the symbols that foster it. Because if we don’t plant our flags, someone else will.
In Boise, a blue island in a bright red state, Mayor Lauren McLean (D) kept the Pride flag flying over City Hall despite Idaho’s HB 96, a law restricting public property to the U.S. and state flags. After Attorney General Raúl Labrador (R) issued a cease-and-desist, McLean responded with a letter threatening legal action and framed her stance as “standing with my community.” The city council followed with a 5-1 vote to adopt the Pride flag as an official city emblem to get around the law.
In Minneapolis, state Sen. Omar Fateh (D) waved a Somali regional flag at an October campaign rally. Supporters defended the gesture as cultural outreach to the city’s large Somali population. Opponents saw something else: a political statement that placed clan or regional identity ahead of shared civic loyalty.
At first glance, these acts look harmless. But historians — and anyone who has studied conflict or national movements — know that flags communicate power. A flag marks territory, signals allegiance, and announces who intends to lead.
A banner raised in a civic space says something about the future of that space. It’s a symbol of conquest — in this case, conquest without firing a shot.
Minneapolis illustrates the stakes. Somali-Americans represent a large and active community, and political leaders court their votes aggressively. But clan politics from Somalia’s fractured landscape often follow families to the United States.
Analysts noted that Minneapolis’ recent mayoral race reflected clan splits, with blocs supporting or opposing Somali candidates not on ideology but lineage. That tension influences local elections and creates new pressures on civic life.
Political imagery matters when communities already navigate competing loyalties. A foreign regional flag held aloft at a campaign rally isn’t a neutral gesture; it’s an invitation to organize political power around identities that do not map cleanly onto American civic culture.
History amplifies that point. For centuries, flags have signaled triumph or defeat long before a treaty forced anyone’s hand. At Fort McHenry in 1814, the sight of the American flag still flying after a night of bombardment, energized defenders and inspired the poem that became our national anthem. At Iwo Jima in 1945, Marines raised the U.S. flag atop Mount Suribachi, transforming a brutal fight into a symbol of American resolve and shifting the morale of both sides.
Flags shape memory. They mark identity. They tell people who stands firm and who gives ground.
RELATED: The real danger isn’t immigration — it’s the refusal to become American

That is why the flags flown on public property matter now. McLean’s use of the Pride flag isn’t just about “love is love.” It supplants the symbol that binds Idahoans across differences. Fateh’s regional Somali flag isn’t simply cultural pride; it injects external political identities into municipal politics and signals a shift in who claims influence over public life.
Americans can shrug at this trend or take it seriously. Civic symbols either unite a people or divide them. A city hall flagpole should unify, not segment communities into competing camps. A political rally should appeal to voters as Americans, not as factions drawn from overseas allegiances.
The answer is not outrage or retaliation. The answer is clarity: reclaim civic symbols that express shared loyalty to a shared country. Fly the U.S. flag. Fly state flags. Encourage communities to celebrate their heritage while affirming the nation that binds them together.
A nation confident in itself does not surrender its symbols. It presents them proudly — on porches, at city halls, and at the center of public life. America’s strength begins with the values and commitments those flags represent.
If we want unity, we must lead with the symbols that foster it. Because if we don’t plant our flags, someone else will.
Socialist Zohran Mamdani’s shocking upset win in June’s Democratic primary for New York City mayor lit up the progressive base while alarming moderates, city residents, and anyone wary of his blend of raw collectivism and pointed racial politics. What few have examined is how that unstable mix carries the seeds of its own collapse.
Collectivism as an economic philosophy is not new. More than a century of evidence shows the consistent failure of its modern form.
The cultural and economic Marxism animating today’s progressive left is a dog’s breakfast of demands promoted in the name of the ‘oppressed.’
Every modern “market” economy includes socialistic features: government ownership or control of production, progressive taxation, industrial regulation, welfare programs, and other redistributive policies. These operate like dials on a control panel, adjusted up or down depending on who holds power. Push the collectivist dials too far, and the system shifts along a spectrum toward central control.
The persistence of collectivism reflects blind faith in what people think should work rather than what does. When the dials turn high, the results almost always damage the human condition. The rare cases of relative success appear in small, culturally homogenous, high-trust societies — and even there, private initiative and meritocracy remain essential.
Progressives love to point to Scandinavia as proof that “socialism works.” Yet the Scandinavian collectivist model actually confirms its limitations, both in its successes and failures.
By the 1990s, these countries reached the limits of their mixed-economy “Nordic Model” after a period of postwar public-sector expansion. Economic reforms and deregulation followed.
What makes their experiment more sustainable than in larger, more diverse nations is not socialism itself but historic cultural cohesion. Until recently, Scandinavia was defined by small size, strong national identity, and ethnic homogeneity. That cohesion has frayed under decades of refugee inflows, prompting reversals. Denmark, for example, has now adopted tougher asylum policies after decades of rising immigration.
That cohesion is absent in New York, which makes Mamdani’s platform especially volatile. His campaign combines extreme economic policies such as rent freezes, government-run grocery stores, and dramatic minimum wage hikes with unabashed racialism. He refused to disavow calls to “globalize the intifada” and openly proposed higher property taxes on “richer and whiter” parts of the city.
The cultural and economic Marxism animating today’s progressive left is a dog’s breakfast of demands promoted in the name of the “oppressed” and seeks to “decolonize” all evidence of Western civilization from modern life. Like most insurgent collectivist movements, the progressive left is united more by what it is against — Enlightenment rationalism, free markets, individual liberty, Judeo-Christian values — than by any coherent program.
RELATED: Stop calling Zohran Mamdani a communist — he’s something worse

At its core, socialism is universalist. It assumes citizens will treat one another as extended family, placing altruism above self-interest. The moment people recognize differences — between groups or individuals — that illusion collapses. True solidarity, homogeneity, and “equality of outcome” demand the suppression of individuality. That’s why the progressive left abandoned “equality” for “equity.” Equality allows for individual difference. Equity enforces uniformity.
Mamdani’s platform exposes collectivism’s core flaw: Solidarity cannot survive out-groups. Once Jews, whites, capitalists, or any other group are branded outsiders, cohesion breaks down. History records what comes next — kulak liquidation in Russia, mass starvation in Mao’s China, the slaughter in Rwanda. Unless the targeted group is small and easily crushed, socialism inevitably devolves into zero-sum tribalism.
Despotic totalitarianism is unlikely at the municipal level in an otherwise free country. But the contradictions of Mamdani’s “tribal socialism” in a multiethnic, heterodox city will bring something else: disappointment, unmet promises, and needless misery. New York’s quality of life will further erode as radical ideology collides with social fragmentation.
If Mamdani wins, the only question is which outlasts the other — socialism or tribalism. History offers the answer. Tribalism survives. And it leaves behind a bitter coda to the American creed that “all men are created equal.”
For as often as the phrase “Christ is King” trends on social media, it seems like a growing number of self-professing Christians have forgotten that it was sin — not skin — that kept Jesus on the cross.
Millions of Americans gathered this past Easter Sunday to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Apart from that ultimate sign of self-sacrifice, we would still be in bondage to sin and face the penalty for indulging it — spiritual death and eternal separation from God. That’s because, according to the Bible, we are all born in sin and remain spiritually dead unless we turn from our sin and place our hope and trust in Christ.
No argument reveals a smaller mind than the impulse to link sin to skin for ideological gain.
Messages circulating on X often sound wildly different, but many follow the same script. On any given day, you’ll find someone — often claiming to be Christian — warning that a specific group poses a unique threat to the American way of life.
Some wrap their claims in the pseudo-academic language of “race realism” and genetic determinism. Others frame it as cultural criticism. But the message stays the same: Those people over there are the real problem.
Years ago, I noticed this pattern in how some black progressives invoked slavery and Jim Crow to argue that “whiteness” itself is an inherently evil force driving racism.
Today, a growing number of white conservatives fire back with crime statistics, claiming black Americans are inherently violent.
Meanwhile, a rainbow coalition of agitators — including Hispanics and Asians — spends its time urging followers to “notice” Jewish control of everything from pornography to U.S. foreign policy.
Different faces, same poison.
Ethnic and political tribalism has convinced many Americans that moral decay is always someone else’s fault. It’s not our problem. It’s their problem.
They chase any story or video that reinforces their worldview and dismiss anything that challenges it. A white police officer involved in a fatal shooting of a black man becomes proof that policing itself is systemically racist. A black teenager who commits a crime becomes a symbol of supposed racial dysfunction — not an individual but a statistic.
Many in this mindset obsess over IQ scores and genetic theories. But no argument reveals a smaller mind than the impulse to link sin to skin for ideological gain.
Christ’s death on the cross should convict every one of us to examine our own hearts. The moment you start measuring your worth by someone else’s failure, you’re already losing the moral battle. Comparative righteousness is a foolish and dangerous game.
The parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector in Luke 18 illustrates the danger of self-righteousness. Pharisees prided themselves on strict adherence to the law, so it’s no surprise that the one in Jesus’ story thanked God for his supposed moral superiority. He fasted, tithed, and avoided obvious sins. He was especially grateful not to be like the tax collector — a judgment that, on the surface, seemed justified.
But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner!”
Jesus shocked the crowd with the conclusion: It was the tax collector — not the outwardly religious Pharisee — who went home justified. He drove the point home with a final line that still cuts: “Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”
The world would look very different — better, even — if more people, especially Christians, followed the example of the tax collector instead of the Pharisee.
Every person, family, and community carries its own burdens. Certain sins may show up more often in some groups than others, but that only looks like moral deficiency when we stop measuring ourselves against God and start judging others as the standard.
That’s why I advocate an “inside-out” approach to social commentary. I focus first on the issues that are common, pressing, and personal. Telling hard truths is difficult enough. It’s even harder when the messenger comes off as an outsider taking shots rather than someone who cares enough to speak from within.
Conservatives have every right to criticize America’s cultural collapse — but they should think twice before using China’s Xi Jinping to deliver the message. And if even Vivek Ramaswamy can’t offer light criticism without backlash, maybe it’s not just the left that has a problem hearing the truth.
The inside-out approach beats the alternative. It forces us to confront our own flaws instead of obsessing over everyone else’s. The outside-in method puts the sins of others under a microscope, while hiding the mirror that would show our own.
That’s why I don’t understand black pastors in neighborhoods torn apart by gang violence who spend their sermons denouncing “white supremacy” or DEI. Those things may be worth discussing — but they’re not why kids are dying in their streets.
Likewise, a white pastor in Wyoming would do much more good addressing his state’s sky-high suicide rate — often involving firearms — than speculating on how rap music and absent fathers are ruining black teenagers in Chicago.
Nothing’s wrong with offering honest insights about what plagues other communities. Tribalism shouldn’t stop us from grieving or rejoicing with people who don’t look like us. But the problem comes when we frame both vice and virtue in ethnic terms.
The apostle Paul didn’t tailor his warnings about idolatry, greed, lust, or murder based on ethnicity. His message was universal because the human condition is universal.
That’s why Christians must always remember: Jesus died for our sin, not our skin.
Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews, in an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, compared Trump’s immigration policies to Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust. He claimed that Hitler didn’t bother with German law — he just hauled people off to death camps in Poland and Hungary. Apparently, that’s what Trump is doing now by deporting MS-13 gang members to El Salvador.
Symone Sanders took it a step further. The MSNBC host suggested that deporting gang-affiliated noncitizens is simply the first step toward deporting black Americans. I’ll wait while you try to do that math.
The debate is about control — weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent.
Media mouthpieces like Sanders and Matthews are just the latest examples of the left’s Pavlovian tribalism when it comes to Trump and immigration. Just say the word “Trump,” and people froth at the mouth before they even hear the sentence. While the media cries “Hitler,” the numbers say otherwise. And numbers don’t lie — the narrative does.
The real “deporter in chief” isn’t Trump. It was President Bill Clinton, who sent back 12.3 million people during his presidency — 11.4 million returns and nearly 900,000 formal removals. President George W. Bush, likewise, presided over 10.3 million deportations — 8.3 million returns and two million removals. Even President Barack Obama, the progressive darling, oversaw 5.5 million deportations, including more than three million formal removals.
So how does Donald Trump stack up? Between 2017 and 2021, Trump deported somewhere between 1.5 million and two million people — dramatically fewer than Obama, Bush, or Clinton. In his current term so far, Trump has deported between 100,000 and 138,000 people. Yes, that’s assertive for a first term — but it's still fewer than Biden was deporting toward the end of his presidency.
The numbers simply don’t support the hysteria.
Who's the “dictator” here? Trump is deporting fewer people, with more legal oversight, and still being compared to history’s most reviled tyrant. Apparently, sending MS-13 gang members — violent criminals — back to their country of origin is now equivalent to genocide.
This debate stopped being about immigration a long time ago. It’s now about control — about weaponizing the courts, twisting language, and using moral panic to silence dissent. It’s about turning Donald Trump into the villain of every story, facts be damned.
If the numbers mattered, we’d be having a very different national conversation. We’d be asking why Bill Clinton deported six times as many people as Trump and never got labeled a fascist. We’d be questioning why Barack Obama’s record-setting removals didn’t spark cries of ethnic cleansing. And we’d be wondering why Trump, whose enforcement was relatively modest by comparison, triggered lawsuits, media hysteria, and endless Nazi analogies.
But facts don’t drive this narrative. The villain does. And in this script, Trump plays the villain — even when he does far less than the so-called heroes who came before him.
Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.