The Mohammunist Manifesto—Transnational Loyalty Overrides National Borders

For followers of both Islam and communism, national patriotism will always be subordinate to their ideologies’ demands.

Milli Sands | August 20, 2026

In revealing the commonalities of the Reds and the Greens in the Red-Green Axis, we have elucidated the shared goals of communists and Muslims, including violence, monopoly rule by elites, slaughter, etc. (See the full list of essays exposing these commonalities at the end of this article.) Here we explore how transnational loyalty overrides national borders.

Islamic political systems and Marxist-Leninist communism both subordinate national loyalty to a transnational community defined by doctrine, and both have shown that this subordination is not just words. When the higher loyalty and the national one have actually come into conflict, adherents of both traditions have been called to choose the higher loyalty, and have done so.

The ummah is the primary community in Islamic political theory: a single body of believers, bound by faith rather than territory, whose obligations to one another do not stop at a border. A stark demonstration came in November 1914, when Ottoman Sultan Mehmed V, acting in his capacity as caliph, proclaimed jihad against the Entente powers.

Five fatwas issued by Sheikh ul-Islam declared the war an individual religious obligation binding on Muslims everywhere, including the roughly 140 million living under British, French, and Russian rule, appealing to a loyalty that ran through the caliphate rather than the empires governing them.

The proclamation reached Muslim communities thousands of miles from Constantinople. On New Year’s Day 1915, in the Australian mining town of Broken Hill, two Muslim cameleers, Badsha Mehmed Gül and Mulla Abdullah, opened fire on a trainload of picnickers, killing four people before being killed themselves.

Gül cited the Sultan’s declaration directly as his motive. A call issued in Constantinople had reached a small Muslim community on the far side of the world and produced violence against the country in which the men resided.

Marxist-Leninist communism built the same structure by statute rather than fatwa. The Communist International’s Twenty-One Conditions, adopted in 1920, bound every affiliated national party to the Comintern’s discipline; Condition 16 made every decision of its congresses and executive committee binding on all of them, regardless of national circumstance.

The test of the doctrine came in 1939, when the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact required French Communists to stop treating the war as an anti-fascist cause and instead denounce it as a meaningless conflict between rival imperialist powers, none worth a worker’s loyalty. The Comintern ordered Maurice Thorez, general secretary of the French Communist Party, to desert.

On October 4, 1939, while France was at war and Thorez was serving in its army, he deserted, fled through Belgium, and reached Moscow. A French military tribunal convicted him in absentia and sentenced him to death. The leader of a major national party had abandoned his country’s army, under his own government’s flag, on instructions from an authority outside it.

The parallel is not that the doctrines reason alike. In fact, the grounds are entirely different, for one is theological, the other historical and organizational.

The commonality is that both constructed a transnational authority capable of issuing a........

© American Thinker