Britain’s Islamo-left gains momentum

Show summary Hide summary

• Flags, banners and an uneasy backdrop to the march
• Organizations in attendance and why some observers were alarmed
  • Specific incidents and contested moments
• How a style of anti-fascism became a middle-class festival
• Where old left alliances with Islamist politics began
• Speakers, rhetoric and the problem of performance politics
• Why many voters feel alienated and how that shaped recent street politics
• Who gets labeled “fascist,” and what gets ignored
• What the march revealed about modern political alliances

I went to the “march against the far right” in central London expecting chants about unity and solidarity. What I found instead was a dissonant mix of placards, pop-up stages and a surprising number of flags belonging to regimes and movements many would call authoritarian — a reminder that public demonstrations can mean very different things to different people.

The event, billed by organizers as a defense of liberal values against rising populism, quickly revealed fault lines: mainstream-left activists rubbing shoulders with groups and banners that have long been accused of aligning with Islamist causes. That collision raised hard questions about who gets to claim the anti-fascist mantle, and what that label means in practice.

Flags, banners and an uneasy backdrop to the march

Within minutes of arriving on Whitehall I saw dozens of flags associated with the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many observers those symbols represent a government that stands accused of severe human-rights abuses; for others in the crowd they appeared as expressions of solidarity with a particular political cause. The sight underscored a central irony of the day: a rally against extremism that included participants supporting, or at least not distancing themselves from, actors widely criticized for their own extremism.

The presence of those banners made a clear impression — and not a comforting one for everyone there. Far from being an incidental detail, the flags and related messaging were woven throughout the march, visible alongside stage programming and speakers.

Organizations in attendance and why some observers were alarmed

The coalition behind the event, the Together Alliance, lists a range of trade unions, activist groups and community organizations as backers. Some of the groups named on the alliance’s website have histories that critics say raise serious questions about alliances on the left.

• Muslim Association of Britain: Long active in anti-war and pro-Palestine campaigns, the organization was founded by Muhammad Sawalha, who has previously been described in media reports as a former Hamas military commander in the West Bank. That background has been repeatedly cited by detractors as a reason to scrutinize the association’s role in broader coalitions.
• Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC): Described by some think-tanks as having links to the Iranian state, the IHRC has attracted controversy for a number of public interventions — including symbolic awards and protest campaigns — that have drawn fierce criticism from survivors and opponents of Islamist violence.

Those affiliations, reported in public sources, are the sort of details that made many onlookers wonder whether the march had blurred the lines between opposing the “far right” and tolerating or endorsing other forms of extremism.

Specific incidents and contested moments

• Speakers and banners reportedly included praise for figures and causes tied to Iran and other Islamist movements — actions that some participants defended as anti-imperialist politics, while others saw them as condoning violent ideologies.
• Earlier public demonstrations organized by some of these groups have included controversial calls or awards that sparked outrage, such as highly provocative gestures in the wake of terrorist attacks or efforts to resist Holocaust remembrance events.

How a style of anti-fascism became a middle-class festival

What was striking about the march was how thoroughly the event adopted the aesthetics of modern protest culture: festival fonts, a dance stage, tote bags and a program that looked as comfortable on a university campus as on a picket line. That atmosphere — cheerful, curated, Instagram-ready — stood in sharp contrast to the militant, working-class roots of anti-fascist organizing in earlier decades.

For many critics, the march felt less like a defensive stand against street violence and more like a branding exercise for a specific urban, middle-class political sensibility. That sensibility often frames immigration concerns, debates over national sovereignty, and anxieties about social change as expressions of bigotry or nostalgia rather than political grievances worth engaging.

Where old left alliances with Islamist politics began

The overlap between segments of the left and Islamist groups is not new. Some on the British left have for decades argued that anti-imperialist narratives and solidarity with Muslim-majority populations could be politically useful. A 1990s pamphlet by a prominent socialist intellectual explicitly suggested that Islamist movements might be tapped as a form of grassroots dissent — a line of thinking that later activists continued to build on.

• High-profile left figures have in recent years used warm language to describe groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, calling members “friends” or characterizing them as part of legitimate resistance movements.
• Stop The War Coalition activists, who were visible at the march, have long pushed a narrative that frames some Islamist organizations as democratic alternatives in the Middle East, a position that critics say ignores the track records of those groups.

Speakers, rhetoric and the problem of performance politics

The lineup of speakers leaned into optimistic, Instagram-ready rhetoric — calls for “love” and “hope,” polished slogans and a visually cohesive stage program. Some of the leading faces fit a pattern of relatively new politicians and activists who rose quickly into the public eye and now act as spokespeople for a brand of progressive politics that prizes symbolic gestures.

That style can cut two ways. To supporters it feels inclusive and modern; to detractors it can read as superficial and tone-deaf — a substitution of performative gestures for hard political listening and policy engagement.

Why many voters feel alienated and how that shaped recent street politics

Behind the spectacle lies a deeper story about public sentiment. Large numbers of people who attended nationalist or migration-skeptical rallies in recent months say they are reacting to real concerns: housing pressures, changes in local communities, and unease about extremist ideologies imported from abroad. Organizers on both sides often frame those concerns in starkly different terms.

• One recent nationalist demonstration reportedly drew over 100,000 people last September; the Together Alliance sprang up partly in response to that turnout.
• Organizers of the anti-right rally claimed very large numbers for their march, while police estimates suggested a considerably smaller crowd — highlighting the gap between political rhetoric and observable turnout.

Rather than interrogating why so many citizens are angry or anxious, some speakers at the anti-right event seemed to treat those voters as misled or manipulated — a stance that risks deepening the political divide instead of closing it.

Who gets labeled “fascist,” and what gets ignored

One recurring theme was the breadth of the “fascist” label in contemporary political debate. Parties and figures who led democratic campaigns for things like national sovereignty or immigration control are frequently called fascist by opponents. For many observers, that language is shorthand for a refusal to acknowledge legitimate political disagreement.

At the same time, critics of the march accused many organizers of downplaying or tolerating Islamist extremism — the very threat that, historically, anti-fascist movements were meant to oppose. Security services’ public reporting and media analyses over the years have repeatedly highlighted Islamist-motivated violence as a significant portion of the terrorist threat in the U.K., a point opponents say was insufficiently addressed at the rally.

What the march revealed about modern political alliances

The day made plain that contemporary protest coalitions are complex and sometimes contradictory. Left-leaning organizers insist they oppose bigotry and authoritarianism, yet their willingness to share platforms with groups denounced for links to violent movements creates uncomfortable optics and sharp criticism.

Whether the new alliances on display at the march are strategic, principled, or simply a product of shared short-term aims, they’ve reshaped how many people view the very idea of anti-fascism — transforming it from a hard-fought, often working-class defense into a broader cultural brand that invites both support and scorn.

Tom Slater is editor of spiked. Follow him on X: @Tom_Slater_.

You might also like:

• Islamo-left alliance: the dark comedy behind its rise
• Al-Quds Day protests spark debate over multiculturalism’s effect on Britain
• Your Party conference: funniest political spectacle in years
• Islamists and progressives: surprising common ground and why it matters
• Greens under fire after lawmaker calls party lunatic, deranged and evil