How does being concerned about spread of Islam in the West make someone far-right?

...it's the liberal left that have lost their marbles.

You nearly managed to avoid resorting to stereotypes! Nice try.

But back on point, fair enough if you are focusing on the hardline ideologies and regimes based on Islam. They are the biggest threat right now. But do you think you're going to manage to tackle that by taking the approach that Islam is a problem? You need to make it clear from the outset that you're either for religion or against it in principle, and from that basis your current focus on Islam is due to the current issues involving a tiny minority of Muslims.

Stereotypes are fine when they are accurate. I used to be a member of the liberal left but liberally left when it became increasingly less rational, more driven by fear, ironically more authoritarian, more emotional, more morally elitist while clinging to ideological extremism and something I could no longer associate with. I'm am apostate essentially. For all intents and purposes, I'm worse to them than a skinhead neo-nazi.

You're giving quite an absolute ultimatum there but there's no basis for it.

The basis for it is that, short of a crazy person with a nuke or two (Trump), brutal regimes based on Islam can only legitimately be brought down by the citizens of those countries. ISIS can only be stopped through starving it of converts. Neither of these things are going to be achieved by Westerners telling them that Islam is bad, which I disagree with anyway. The change is only going to come from enough Muslims in these places recognising that their religion doesn't have to be practised in such a hardline fashion (which the majority know anyway) and also being brave enough to make their voices heard.

And that final part is the trickiest bit. We've all heard of moderate personalities hacked to death for preaching tolerance. Would any of us have the bravery to stick our heads above the parapet in such a country?

I'll do that when you stop pretending the majority of people who criticise Islam do so fairly, differentiating between a religion followed peacefully by over a billion people worldwide and an ideology involving a tiny minority of Muslims involved in terrorism

Done? So, Islam is clearly not going anywhere in a hurry and neither is Christianity or any of the other major religions. So the question is, how do we minimise the negative elements of organised religion?

I think this the important part - Islam itself is not an ideology, it is a religion.

Just like Christianity has poisonous ideologies based upon it (KKK, sectarianism in Ireland),

Islam has ideologies cultivated based upon it. ISIS being of course the most prominent,

alongside brutal regimes such as in Saudi Arabia,

Whilst most of the worst of Christian idologies and regimes have died out in the last few centuries, many Islamic ones still persist and are even growing.

But to rail against Islam itself is to rail against the billions of peaceful Muslims living all around the world.

For me it is when people do this that I am likely to have some thoughts about their attitudes, with the exception of those who condemn all organised religion, which is a viewpoint that I don't agree with but do understand.

I'll do that when you stop pretending the majority of people who criticise Islam do so fairly, differentiating between a religion followed peacefully by over a billion people worldwide and an ideology involving a tiny minority of Muslims involved in terrorism

However Islam is no more an ideology than Christianity or Buddhism.

Islam became an ideology the moment the concept of sharia law was introduced into it, which deals not just with a man's relationship with the purported deity but also has rules for man's dealings with others, how he may allocate his financial legacy, the position of women in society and with punishments for supposed sins and crimes.

I'll do that when you stop pretending the majority of people who criticise Islam do so fairly, differentiating between a religion followed peacefully by over a billion people worldwide and an ideology involving a tiny minority of Muslims involved in terrorism

how do we minimise the negative elements of organised religion?

False dichotomy.
There are many millions of Muslims who, whilst not engaged in "violent jihad" themselves, will refuse to condemn both the aims of the jihadists, and the scriptural justifications that they use.

The "peaceful" Muslim who believes that every word of the Quran is still acceptable and applicable, and that the example of Muhammad is the ultimate role model for all humanity, is as much a part of the problem as the "violent" Muslims who actually act on those words and examples.

It is the silent acquiescance of the majority that gives the minority its legitimacy, and until that majority can unite and say "The Quran is not perfect, timeless and universal. It is a historically and culturally relative document that can be looked at through a revisionist and enlightened lens", then Islam will continue to be an issue unlike Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, etc.

Just the the commandments and intstructions in the Bible on how to live also make Christianity an ideology?

This is incorrect. Unlike all other religions, Islam contains both the blueprint and the fine detail for society - religious, social, economic, legal, military. It is an ideology by any definition.

The KKK was based on white supremacy and economic control of the Southern states after the Civil War - not Christianity.

ISIS does not follow an ideology separate to Islam. It follows a literalist, retentionist and unmodernised Islam. Every action and statement is referenced to the Quran or sunnah.

The constitution of Saudi Arabia is the Quran and sunnah. That is why it is so brutal!

And where do these "Islamic states" get their ideology from?
A recent bill in the Pakistan partliament to outlaw domestic violence was rejected because powerful Islamic groups condemned it as unislamic - because the Quran gives Muslims permission to beat disobedient wives, under certain conditions. It is the adherance to Islamic ideology that perpetuates the brutality.
It is no coincidence that the more secular a system, the better its record on human rights, gender equality, etc.

Exactly.
As should the source of the ideology. You cannot condemn ISIS for using female captives for sex if you do not condemn the Quran and sunnah for permitting the use of female captives for sex.
It really is that simple.

It is vitally important to be able to distinguish between an ideology, and the behaviour of individuals who subscribe to that ideology.
If you use the behaviour of Muslims as indicative of the nature of Islam, then you must also accept the behaviour of those Muslims in ISIS, Boko Haram, al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc, etc... as "Islamic".

It is simply because Islam has such a high profile that it receives more attention. And its profile has led to more people finding out more about Islam as an ideology and judging Islam on that, rather than the behaviour of the Muslims that they know and meet.

And that is where it gets complicated and unlike any other current religion.
Few Muslims in the west (and certainly none that I know) would admit to, or support, wife beating, of keeping slaves and raping the females, or flogging people for having adult, consensual sex.
However, if you ask them to condemn or reject the passages of the Quran that explicitly allow these things, they will refuse - despite also claiming that the Quran is the perfect, universal and timeless guide for all humanity, because it is the actual, literal word of god.

the prominence of extremist regimes based on Islamic scripture is why that is the current focus is on Islam.

But I don't believe Islam is an worse or any more an ideology than any other major religion, and as such we have to be consistent in our attitudes to any religion.

Do you expect Irish people to continually apologise for sectarian violence?

Do you expect Christians across USA to continually condemn those who attack abortion doctors?

Do you expect Buddhists to continually apologise for Buddhist monks in Tibet murdering men, women and children?

No. Islam's biggest problem is that its base scripture states unequivocally that it was dictated directly by the supposed deity to a chosen "prophet", that it is complete and perfect, applicable for all time in all places, and that there is no room in the religion for interpretations. No other religion makes such claims for itself, which suited Mohammed in his quest to get his superstitious desert followers to do his bidding, but those statements leave modern Moslems with no room for wriggling against the Islamists.

The same Islamic scripture demonstrates that Islam condones slavery, treats women as second class citizens (as are unbelievers, of course) and has many other dogma that are contrary to twenty-first century morality and political thinking in the west. This will always cause massive tensions between Moslems and other western citizens.

How do you plan to overcome these problems?