Should probably say that it isn't really any specific side of the political spectrum that wants to tear down society. It's just that liberalism is by definition change.
Yes, there definitely are the people who want to tear down society. But most
[citation needed] just want to get reforms through the existing government and maybe protest if the government refuses.
Of course, in the Middle East, the climate is different, because of oil, authoritarian governments, diversity, and modernity. The Arab Spring was a failure that just made it worse, except for Tunisia. People who want change in society there, for good or for ill, have no other option but to fight for it.
In Libya, nobody filled the vacuum left by Qaddafi, and the civil war is still raging. Hell, CIA is actually welcome in some places there because they provide stable government, if an oppressive one.
In Egypt, they're on their third dictator since Mubarak, Dr. Mohamed Morsi, who won with 51% of the vote and quickly seized power for his party, pissing off the 49%.
In Lebanon, civil war erupted due to the
utter clusterforget of diversity.In Syria, a small minority, the Alawites, represented by Bashar al-Assad rules over the Sunni majority, which pisses them off, in addition to conflict over oil.
In Iraq, the post-Saddam government was not strong enough to keep terrorists in check, leading to them seizing territory and calling themselves the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Also, oil.
In Iran, Britain had an unfair deal to give Iran 10% of the oil profits from their fields, compared to Saudi Arabia getting 50%. When a democratically elected leader nationalized the oil fields, the CIA ousted him and installed a dictator.
Poll