Why The Far Left Hates Israel

At the 1984 Republican National Convention, UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick delivered a scathing rebuke of leftist critics of the Reagan administration. Focusing on the military operation in Grenada to restore law and order, protect American students, and contain the communists, Kirkpatrick pushed back against leftists who opposed the Reagan administration. She stated, “They said that saving Grenada from terror and totalitarianism was the wrong thing to do - they didn't blame Cuba or the communists for threatening American students and murdering Grenadians - they blamed the United States instead. But then, somehow, they always blame America first.” Kirkpatrick would go on to describe how these same people would “blame America first” instead of terrorists in Lebanon, Soviets for ending negotiations and oppressing people, or Marxist dictators in Central America.

The story of Kirkpatrick coming to work for President Reagan is part of the overall story of why left-wing activists and politicians turned against Israel. She was an AFL-CIO Democrat but also was an adamant anti-communist, akin to her hero Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson. Like Jackson, Kirkpatrick was quite liberal when it came to domestic policy, but that same liberalism led her to oppose the Stalinists and Marxists who threatened the United States. This was generally the position of the Democrats from Truman through Johnson. However, the times would change as the anti-war movement of the 1960’s shifted a large section of the Democrat Party. In 1972, Governor George McGovern would win the nomination, and he promoted an anti-war agenda that was essentially untenable during the Cold War (helping Nixon win 49 out of 50 states). Since then, the Democrats have regularly had a contingent within the party that opposed US foreign policy on both pacifistic and anti-American principles.

Opposition to Israel

Because of McGovern’s candidacy and Carter’s subsequent presidency that adhered to a similar platform, foreign policy experts like Kirkpatrick slowly moved to the Republican Party (what were termed the neoconservatives). Though usually liberal on domestic politics, they rejected the foreign policy of the far left. The left-wing in America was not the only group to support these views as much of the left in Europe similarly followed such principles. From Jeremy Corbyn to Willy Brandt, European leftists also held an anti-American view, but that is only one aspect to this worldview. This group in America, Europe, and elsewhere deeply loathe Western traditions and values and view European imperialism as the greatest evil in history (ignoring the imperialism of everyone else), thinking modern Western foreign policy is still essentially neocolonial. That starts the basis for why the far-left hates Israel so much as well.

They see Israel as representative of settler colonialism, imperialism, and Western values, and the far-left can only view these issues through the Marxist paradigm of “oppressor” and “oppressed.” They do not believe in ideology (ironically) or belief systems because they reject the concept of truth. Because truth does not exist, only power does. Therefore, Israel has the power and is the oppressor. This paradigm is largely drawn from their often gross misinterpretation of the history of Palestine and Israel, such as believing the diaspora Jews who came to the area did not have a legal right to do so. Leftists believe that Israel stole all of the land in Mandatory Palestine and then engaged in persistent conquest. However, this completely ignores the history of the Jewish National Fund (and other Jewish organizations) buying land in Ottoman Syria/Mandatory Palestine and the partition under internal law via United Nations Resolution 181 (II). It also ignores the many offering of land for peace that have occurred that Palestinians rejected (from the partition in 1948 through the Camp David negotiations in the 1990s).

Then there are of course the human rights issues. Leftists have generally supported “human rights,” but there is a deep hypocrisy in their approach. As Gadi Taub wrote in Tablet, “By using gross double standards, this industry portrays Israel as a uniquely monstrous violator of human rights. The world’s actual egregious violators of human rights—such as China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, and most of Israel’s neighbors—don’t receive a fraction of the moralizing attention that Israel gets.”

Whatever the far-left’s interpretation of history is, they have placed the Palestinian issue in the oppressor-oppressed paradigm and incorporated it into their global revolutionary outlook. A critical aspect of the far-left is their desire to abrogate all traditions, institutions, customs, and hierarchies in a quixotic pursuit of an egalitarian utopia. This is why they call for an end to patriarchy, racial inequalities, borders, Western intervention in conflict, wealth accumulation, and religion while supporting giving land back to natives and reparations. The end goal is the elimination of the “evil oppressor” in whatever form they deem it takes, and they view any disparity – material or otherwise, no matter the cause – as inherently unjust. That paradigm is also what legitimizes violence, riots, and terrorism (what they call “resistance”) as attacking “oppressors” is legitimate by its very nature.

Antisemitism and Electoral Politics

Many left-wing groups seemed to celebrate the terrorist attack on October 7 instead of denouncing the violence. The national chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine referred to it as "a historic win for the Palestinian resistance." At Harvard, a coalition of 34 student organizations issued a statement holding "the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence." The Democratic Socialists of America promoted a pro-Palestinian rally in New York where participants reportedly chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied.” All of that coincided with a rise in antisemitic incidents motivated by anti-Zionism. According to Arie Perliger, Director of Security Studies at UMass Lowell, “In the U.S., our data shows that 95% of antisemitic incidents motivated by Israel’s policies were perpetrated by far-left or unidentified activists. Just 5% were perpetrated by known far-right activists.” During the violent protests on college campuses last year, there was a significant surge in antisemitic attacks. Tracked by the Anti-Defamation League, the data showed that 73% of Jewish college students experience or witnessed antisemitism in the 2023-24 academic calendar. Also in the data, 46% of students who people assumed were Jewish stated that they had been targeted with antisemitism based on the assumption they were Jewish (even though they were not).

There are political implications of the far-left’s anti-Israel bias as well that center-left and liberal parties must contend with, especially because of the connection to antisemitic attacks as described above. In the UK, Keir Starmer’s leadership of the Labour Party has focused on moderating its stance on Israel and combating antisemitism. Starmer’s efforts include suspending members who made controversial statements about Israel and ensuring that the party maintains a disciplined and moderate position on the issue. His strategy has been successful, which likely helped Labour in the election by shedding the image from Corbyn. In addition, the conflict in Gaza has intensified divisions within the French left. A coalition of center-left and far-left parties was formed to counter the far-right National Rally, despite deep disagreements over Israel. The far-left France Unbowed's refusal to label Hamas as a terrorist organization led to tensions, with some center-left leaders, including President Emmanuel Macron, advocating for a more moderate stance and distancing from far-left figures accused of antisemitism.

Similarly, the Democratic Party faces internal conflict over its approach to Israel, with pro-Israel and further-left factions clashing. The primary challenge of Representative Jamaal Bowman highlighted the party's struggle with its position on Israel when he lost to a pro-Israel centrist. President Biden notably aligned more closely with pro-Israel sentiments, diverging from his previous positions and avoiding the progressive left’s critiques on the issue. Democrats will have to balance between the two as many moderates will be turned off by an overtly anti-Israel campaign, but the majority of young progressives are adamantly anti-Israel. According to Pew, 56% of Americans under 30 had an unfavorable view of Israel as Gen Z forgets about the Holocaust, and a full third of those 21-30 condoned Hamas's terrorist attack. The coalition will have a hard time staying together based on this data.

Ideology and Forecasting

Ideology plays a critical role in forecasting behavior in both domestic and foreign policy, as this newsletter has discussed multiple times (see here, here, here, here, here, and here). That is why security professionals need to understand why the far left (and increasingly the left in general) hates Israel. It is not specifically about the Israel issue, though sometimes that will be part of the analytic question. Rather, it is about understanding the broader ideology of a political movement that could influence the next administration in the United States and other governments in places like Europe. Similar to how analysts needed to understand the anti-communism and Manicheanism of conservative/right-wing governments during the Cold War and War on Terror to explain their foreign policy choices, the revolutionary view of the far-left/left-wing that places all issues into the Marxist oppressor-oppressed paradigm is needed to explain their foreign policy choices.

Importantly, this ideological issue informs analysts and security professionals about the changes and challenges in domestic politics and election forecasting, helping delineate potential political risks. Recognizing the oppressor-oppressed paradigm explains the policy choices of politicians like Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders. Depending on the appointments of Vice President Harris’s cabinet (if she wins the election), knowing this paradigm will make forecasting various policies easier. Then there is the issue of protests, riots, and civil unrest stemming from this ideology, explaining why so many pro-Palestine/anti-Israel protests have turned to violence. Ideology is a quintessential explanatory variable, and the far-left’s hatred of Israel is a useful issue to understand their framework and views.