“Dinesh D’Souza CALLS OUT The Left’s Double Standard About ICE”
Dinesh D’Souza, a conservative commentator and filmmaker, has never shied away from challenging the prevailing narratives in American politics. In his latest critique, D’Souza goes after the left’s hypocrisy, particularly its stance on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and law enforcement’s treatment of individuals in the context of illegal immigration.
In a powerful interview, D’Souza delved into how the left, including media outlets and activist organizations, have long condemned ICE and other law enforcement agencies for their role in enforcing immigration laws. However, he argues that the left’s calls for ICE’s dismantling and vilification fail to match the reality of the public’s responsibility toward maintaining a secure and lawful society. The hypocrisy, he suggests, lies in how the left selectively chooses when to criticize law enforcement and which issues they choose to highlight.
“We see what happened in Israel with the amount of violence Hamas unleashed on October 7th. This was denied by women’s rights groups around the world, who failed to recognize the brutality for what it was,” D’Souza begins, drawing a parallel with a tragic incident involving law enforcement in Minnesota. “The woman was seen as a victim of the state, even though she had been actively involved in efforts against ICE—breaking the law in the process.”
D’Souza points to the double standard often demonstrated by liberal media and activists. He notes that when it comes to law enforcement, specifically ICE, the left is quick to cast them as villains. But when similar or even more significant infractions are committed by those sympathetic to leftist causes, the same critics go silent or even defend the violators. This uneven criticism from the left, according to D’Souza, creates a culture of fear in the media and in political discourse.
Imagine a similar incident under the Biden administration, D’Souza challenges. “Let’s say an ICE officer arrests someone illegally under President Biden’s watch. If Biden and Harris came out and said, ‘No, we stand behind the officer; he was in the right,’ the left would go silent. It would all just disappear,” D’Souza contends, emphasizing how much the left’s stance on law enforcement fluctuates depending on the political climate and who is in power.
This stance of selective outrage—where some actions are seen as unforgivable and others go unchallenged—has become a pattern, according to D’Souza. The left, he argues, is not interested in a nuanced understanding of law enforcement. “They don’t care about the facts themselves,” he asserts. “They have a framework, a narrative that they will support no matter what facts are presented to them. Any facts that contradict their narrative are minimized or ignored.”
D’Souza’s critique extends beyond just ICE. He explores how the left operates as a political machine, prioritizing identity politics over the actual application of law and justice. He points out the widespread phenomenon where people—especially young liberals—are indoctrinated into rejecting facts that do not fit the progressive framework.
“This is why, in campuses across America, you see these ideologues pushing a distorted view of reality,” D’Souza continues. “Young people are not coming to these conclusions on their own. They’re being manipulated by an academic and media elite who use social pressure to enforce a specific narrative. If you disagree with that narrative, you’re deemed uneducated or uninformed.”
Drawing from his personal experiences, D’Souza highlights how institutions, especially universities, have adopted a system of appeasement that panders to the vocal minorities in the name of ideological purity. “There’s a tremendous amount of fear within academic circles about losing funding or facing public backlash,” he explains. “These institutions may claim that they are objective and unbiased, but the truth is that money and social power are behind the decisions they make. Big donors, such as those from Qatar, are funding specific narratives. And the professors? They follow suit because their departments are dependent on that cash flow.”
But the ideological power isn’t the only factor in the equation. The fear of public retribution is equally potent, according to D’Souza. “I’ve seen this firsthand. Even in the most prestigious institutions, administrators and faculty are terrified of what might happen if they don’t conform to the ideology that the left pushes forward. They are afraid of being exposed, of losing their status or reputation,” he states, adding that the left is skilled at using fear as a political weapon to maintain dominance over institutions.
In his view, figures like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and other prominent conservatives who have recently distanced themselves from Israel’s interests are also part of a broader ideological movement that reflects these dynamics. “Tucker and Candace are the Pied Pipers leading a generation of disillusioned young people who feel like they have no stake in the future of the country,” D’Souza explains. “But their answer is not a thoughtful critique. It’s to pit one group against another—to divide, not to unite. And this is precisely where the real problem lies.”
D’Souza identifies the underlying issue that fuels the left’s contradictory stance: the use of selective outrage to drive a political agenda. “What they’re doing is fundamentally ideological. They want to create a society where people feel so alienated that they turn against institutions—institutions that have made the country great, including law enforcement, the military, and even Israel, which has long been an ally of the U.S.”
The problem of double standards and hypocrisy, D’Souza argues, is emblematic of the broader trends that have plagued American political discourse. For years, the left has pushed for policies that de-legitimize traditional law enforcement agencies, calling for their abolition or defunding. But when it serves their narrative, these same institutions are suddenly presented as victims of systemic injustice.
“Look at how the left has embraced movements like Black Lives Matter, which was founded on a platform of anti-police rhetoric, only to switch gears when it becomes convenient,” D’Souza points out. “It’s clear that the narrative is manipulated not to address real issues, but to push an ideological agenda that aims to undermine the structures of American governance.”
For D’Souza, the key is recognizing that these contradictions are not isolated events—they are part of a concerted effort to reshape American society into something that serves the interests of an elite few, at the cost of the values that have long been at the heart of the nation. “We are at a crossroads, and we must decide whether we will allow these narratives to continue to drive us apart or if we will return to the fundamental principles that made America great,” he concludes.
D’Souza’s critique of the left’s double standard regarding ICE is not just an indictment of their views on law enforcement—it’s a call to action for all Americans who believe in the rule of law, national security, and the fair treatment of all citizens, regardless of their political beliefs. The left’s manipulation of these issues has gone too far, and it’s time to call out the hypocrisy for what it is. Only by confronting these contradictions head-on can the nation begin to heal from the ideological divisions that have plagued its politics.
