Palestinians, Victims of Liberal Hypocrisy
On Benjamin Netanyahu, Joe Biden, MAGA, and pointing fingers.
Beneath the unblinking gaze of history, we find ourselves, the self-proclaimed guardians of American progress, perched precariously at a crossroads. It is a juncture of profound moral reckoning, a divergence of paths so profound and so fraught with the weight of our collective beliefs that to stand here is to feel the very earth quiver beneath our feet.
In this place, where the melody of human suffering plays a constant background score, where many of my progressive Jewish friends feel isolated for their calls to empathize with people in Gaza, where those aiming to recognize the humanity of innocent Palestinians have been demonized for doing so, we are teetering on no return.
It is a dark place we are at, and we must discuss it, because it threatens to undo the entire world.
On June 16, 2015, with a campaign rally and a 46-minute speech, Donald Trump announced his first run for President of the United States. Almost as soon as he launched his campaign, the support he received was ecstatic and unyielding, cascading from the many corners of the United States. The MAGA movement was born.
As a Black American Progressive, I was not at all surprised by Trump’s support, but I can recall distinctly how many liberals stood in disbelief. How could people so vehemently tether themselves to a man who effortlessly tramples on the ideals of equality and justice, ideals that are, to some, as American as the flag itself. They pondered, with furrowed brows and troubled hearts, how these individuals could be so lost to the glaring falsehoods propagated by Fox News, could swallow whole the bitter pills of propaganda that demonized immigrants, Black people, and the LGBTQ+ community.
They could not understand how MAGA supporters could cosign policies and actions of the Trump Administration that offered so little empathy and even less humanity.
Yet, in the shadow of the terror that unfolded on October 7th, 2023, when Hamas struck against Israel, it has become increasingly clear that many of those liberals who pointed fingers and chastised those who became MAGA supporters have fallen into the same right-wing trappings as them. Leading many to find themselves aligned with a leader and government that is many things — but liberal is certainly not one of them.
In the aftermath of the Hamas attack, the Israeli government declared its intent to dismantle the terrorist organization, branding it a necessary defense against terror. But their instruments of war have known no such precision, there has been no discriminating hand, and the consequence has been a mortifying loss of life in Gaza.
As I write this, over 9,500 souls have been extinguished, and amongst these, children make up more than 40% of the deceased. These are not mere numbers; these are stories cut short, dreams unfulfilled, and futures eradicated.
This is not to say that Israel has not suffered losses of its own, or that the hostages taken by Hamas are somehow unimportant. But we cannot, in good conscience, ignore the staggering disparity in the scale of harm. Over 1.5 Million Palestinians have been displaced, over 26,000 Palestinians have been injured, more than 48,000 homes have been destroyed, and over 100 health facilities have been decimated. Not to mention resources such as water, food, electricity, and internet being cut off.
We cannot turn away from the truth of those heartbreaking metrics, nor the multitude of other truths that define not only this moment but the countless moments and individuals that have paved the path to it. For it is precisely in the erasure of truth that some liberals find themselves ensnared in the same frenzy of bloodlust, dehumanizing rhetoric, and a willful ignorance of facts that they so adamantly decry in the MAGA movement.
It is often said that the issue of Israel and Palestine is a complicated or complex one. I would beg to differ. Yes, the geopolitical implications and the long winding history may take some time to become familiar with, the grievances, religious entanglements, and endless cycles of retaliation. But, I believe “complexity” is often used as a way to keep people in the dark or an alibi for moral cowardice.
If we peel back the layers, we find at the core of this issue, there are shades as plain as day for anyone who believes in basic human rights and dignity. Which is why it’s important to unpack what exactly many liberals are supporting in this moment.
First, it's imperative to grapple with the reality that Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, stands as a figurehead of hardline right-wing politics. In fact, his administration is seen by many as the most right-wing and religiously conservative in Israel’s history. Netanyahu, the country’s longest-serving prime minister, embodies more than just a political office; he symbolizes an ideology, a movement, a relentless march towards a certain vision of Israel.
“As long as I am prime minister of Israel, there will not be an independent Palestinian state.”
This statement made during one of Netanyahu’s election campaigns, succinctly summarizing his position on Palestinian freedom.
Netanyahu is so right-wing that his political opposition argued, his re-ascension to Prime Minister would bring about an end of democracy in Israel, and potentially an end to Israel itself. Thus, his existence and views have spurred a groundswell of resistance. Over the years, thousands upon thousands have stood against him.
This internal turmoil is a backdrop to the harrowing siege in Gaza, where Netanyahu’s machinery of war grinds against the bones of the oppressed. The scenes from Gaza are not just footnotes in a history book; they are a living, breathing testament to policies and strategies that Netanyahu's administration has wielded like a sword. An administration that has come under fire for officials such as Heritage Minister, Amichai Eliyahu, suggesting that nuclear weapons would be an option in Gaza and Israeli Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, stating “We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly.” To which the Human Rights Watch said the Defense Minister’s language was “an invitation to commit a war crime.”
And Netanyahu certainly has the tools to commit said war crimes.
Armed with the might of one of the world's most powerful militaries in the world, and backed by a staggering $3.3 billion in annual military aid from the United States, Netanyahu has launched his fury and bigotry upon the Gaza Strip. One of the most densely populated regions on the planet. Since the onset of this siege, Gaza’s narrow streets and packed homes, have echoed with the roar of Israeli bombs. To the tune of roughly 25,000 tons of explosives.
To contemplate this figure is to wrestle with a realm of devastation that borders on the incomprehensible. These attacks, are thought by many, to bear a destructive power twice that of a nuclear bomb. Raining down not on military installations, but on the heads of ordinary people, on the fabric of everyday life.
Israeli officials have stated that their military actions are in an effort to wipe out Hamas. But even if true, the question remains, at what cost? For instance, Israel was accused of bombing a hospital, to which they claimed Hamas had lied about. But then just days later Israel admitted to bombing a densely populated refugee camp. Which it claims was to kill one Hamas commander. Just one.
Meanwhile, Palestinians don’t even have a standing military to defend itself. As Hamas, is again, a terrorist organization, not a military force in any conventional sense.
On numerous occasions, Israeli leadership has spoken to the power that Hamas has within Gaza and the need to put a stop to it. But rarely do they mention that Israel is part of the root of Hamas' ascendancy in Gaza.
At the end of the 20th century, Israel was grappling with the complexities of Palestinian nationalism, found in the religiously oriented Hamas a counterweight to the secular Fatah and the broader Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In the calculus of the moment, Israel took a strategic gambit — empower a religiously motivated organization to undercut the secular nationalist movement.
Yet, as in many historical gambits, the unintended consequences were profound. In strengthening Hamas, the Israeli strategy inadvertently laid the groundwork for a future adversary. This move was not born of ignorance but of a short-sighted politicking, where the long-term implications were sacrificed at the altar of immediate geopolitical gains.
As Netanyahu later ascended to power, his hardline stance against Hamas stood in stark contrast to the earlier Israeli policies that had, in part, facilitated the group's rise. Netanyahu, the bitter opponent of Hamas, now faces an entity whose roots in Gaza were fertilized by policies his predecessors set in motion, policies that he, too, did not fully disentangle from.
Most of the sensible world condemns Hamas, and we might not be in this current moment had Israel’s leadership not watered their seed years ago.
Israel, an ally written into the star-spangled banner of our foreign policy, has not merely encircled the lives in Gaza, but has, through decades of oppression, transmuted generations into ghosts of a life deferred — phantoms in their own land, shadows within the oppression that is often dubbed an “open-air prison.” This euphemism, as it stands, I believe softens the language of a harsher reality — that Gaza, for generations, has not so much been a prison but rather an exhibit of human beings living as the spoils of colonization. Hostages.
It is also interesting to consider that this conflict is being referred to as a war. For war implies a contest between armies, a clash of near equals, however disproportionate they may be. But the history books written in the blood and breath of Gaza’s children, the disfigured topographies of once-neighboring homes, and the extinguished masses of families, testify not to a war but to a spectacle of slaughter. Genocide.
To name it otherwise is to be complicit in the perpetuation of its occurrence.
And so, if we are to be honest stewards of history, we must call things by their true names. For in the naming is the acknowledgment of the act, and in the acknowledgment, the possibility of justice. What befalls Gaza is not collateral damage— it is the fruit of a poisonous tree whose roots are watered with the notion that some lives are inherently worth more than others.
In grappling with the question of how a nation might enact such brutalities under the gaze of the world, and how supposed liberal leaning Americans could stand complicit — and in support — we must understand narrative control. An effort where truth is not merely obscured, but crafted and molded like clay in the potter's hands. It is here, in the bending of narrative, that we uncover some of the foundation of this liberal hypocrisy.
Consider, if you will, the strategic plotting of Israel's right-wing government, a regime that, with both the diligence and subtlety of a master illusionist, has poured its resources into the crafting of a narrative so potent, so pervasive, that it veils the grim realities of Gaza behind a curtain of propaganda. This is not mere dissemination of information; it is the architecture of perception, a deliberate construction of reality where marketing and disinformation intertwine like serpents, whispering half-truths and outright fabrications into the ears of a global audience.
And when the sheen of their narrative begins to tarnish under the scrutiny of truth, they resort to more draconian measures — the blackout of communication in Gaza, a modern-day silencing of voices. This act, this erasure of presence, transforms the experiences of journalists, activists, and civilians into hearsay. Their narratives, their stories, their pleas, their cries for justice, all smothered beneath an iron curtain.
To discern the magnitude of this narrative control, one can also glance at the social media frontlines — the TikTok and Twitter accounts of Israel and the IDF. Here, in these digital realms, a war of perception is waged with every post and tweet, a relentless effort to cast themselves in a light of benevolence, righteousness, and faux relatability. The strategies employed by Netanyahu and his regime bear an uncanny resemblance to those of Donald Trump and his mastery of social media, to the mechanisms of right-wing American media entities and MAGA leadership. It is a shared playbook of distortion and diversion, a common thread weaving through the story of our society.
Thinking further about the issue of narrative ownership, we must also look at the Western media's selective lens, which reveals a disconcerting imbalance in the portrayal of human suffering and dignity. In most of Western journalism, the narrative has been skewed, favoring stories that amplify the humanity of Israelis while relegating Palestinians to mere footnotes, often only mentioned in the context of Hamas.
The Western media, in its portrayal, often ignores that the Palestinian people are not a monolith, they are individuals with dreams, aspirations, and daily struggles, much like you and I. However, this nuanced portrayal seldom finds its way to the forefront of public discourse. Both historically and in the days of this current conflict. The stories that dominate the airwaves and print are those that align with a preconceived narrative, one that implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, suggests that the lives of millions of Palestinians are entwined with, or even indistinguishable from, the actions of Hamas. This narrative serves a dual purpose: it dehumanizes an entire population and simultaneously justifies the disproportionate use of force against them.
Which is largely why it has been so parroted on social media by individuals.
The political arena mirrors this skewed narrative. Politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, have spoken in a language soaked in the pain and trauma of the Israeli and broader Jewish community, while the plight of Palestinians and those from Arab, Muslim, and Middle Eastern backgrounds is conspicuously absent from their discourse. This selective empathy is not just a failure of policy but a moral failing, a narrative that has effectively erased the humanity of an entire people from much of the American liberal consciousness.
A poignant example of this came from President Joe Biden, who, in a moment that reverberated around the world, claimed to have seen images of beheaded Israeli children. This statement, later revealed to be untrue, spread like wildfire, igniting outrage and and even less empathy for the plight of Palestinians. Especially with Joe Biden’s voter base and liberal celebrities.
This incident is emblematic of a larger issue — the readiness to accept and propagate narratives that fit a certain agenda, without due diligence or regard for the truth. It underscores the powerful and often dangerous role that narrative plays in shaping public opinion and policy. The truth is, had Trump, who is widely accepted as a racist, done the same thing, it would have been a far larger issue. Yet Biden and his administration have handled this moment no different than I would have expected Trump to.
But I believe the most insidious of narrative control has been the conflation of criticism of Israel’s government, its policies, and its military strategies with an attack on the global Jewish community. This conflation is not merely an error in judgment or a misunderstanding; it is a deliberate strategy, an act of narrative alchemy turning legitimate critique into something it often times is not. Israel and its allies have somehow framed all calls for Palestinian freedom as antisemitism.
It is as if to say, by some dark logic, that speaking against a right-wing government is to invoke the specter of hatred against all Jewish people. This is a dangerous and duplicitous game. Similar to saying that criticism of the Trump or Biden administrations is inherently tied to hatred of all white Americans. It blurs the line between political discourse and ethnic vilification, between the actions of a state and the identity of a people. In this narrative, dissent becomes sacrilege, and the critic, no matter how reasoned or compassionate their argument, is rendered a bigot.
Even the protests that have arisen in support of a ceasefire, in support of peace, are branded as gatherings steeped in antisemitism. Which is a gross mischaracterization, a narrative spun with the threads of deceit and fear. These protests, in their overwhelming majority, are not cauldrons of hate but crucibles of hope. They are gatherings of individuals from diverse backgrounds, unified not by a shared animosity towards Jewish people but by a collective yearning for an end to bloodshed.
Even more telling is the treatment of Jewish organizations, groups, and Rabbis who have stood in solidarity with the calls for a ceasefire and Palestinian dignity. These voices, emanating from within the Jewish community, are not spared the brush of condemnation. They, too, are labeled antisemitic, their calls for peace twisted into a betrayal of their community. This is the sadness to which the narrative has stooped — where even those of Jewish faith, advocating for an end to violence, are accused of harboring hatred against their own.
Antisemitism, a real and poisonous strain of hatred, does indeed persist in the world, perhaps now more than it has in generations during this climate of heightened tension. But to use the specter of this hatred as a shield against all criticism, to equate the desire for peace with the propagation of hate, is a disservice to the very real struggles against antisemitism. A tactic that undermines the fight against bigotry, turning a serious and necessary battle into a tool of political convenience.
In the midst of all we have discussed, and this moral storm that rages, one must reckon with the reality that a true commitment to human dignity inexorably leads to the support of the Palestinian cause, or at the very least, a fervent call for a ceasefire. The numbers, the images, the peril, does not lie.
Yet, the landscape of public opinion is skewed, distorted by the voices of the ill-informed and the racist, figures like Amy Schumer, Michael Rapaport, Ben Shapiro, and Sarah Silverman. Their narratives, marred by ignorance, somehow ring louder in some circles than the reasoned and informed voices of Angela Davis, Noam Chomsky, the United Nations, and a legion of human rights NGOs, scholars, activists, and writers.
This clash in whom some are choosing to listen to reveals not just a fracture in understanding but a profound chasm in the self-professed liberalism of many.
It raises the ultimate question of this reflection, heavy with implication: Is this issue less about complexity, misunderstanding, and lacking information, and more a revelation that certain individuals, draped in the guise of liberalism, are in essence not so different from the MAGA movement they condemn? Their rhetoric, though perhaps more veiled, is nonetheless a pillar supporting the same wheel of injustice, akin to the foundations upon which Trump's Muslim ban was erected.
Therein lies the depth of the hypocrisy.
The act of solidarity with a government steeped in right-wing ideology, whether it manifests in the criminalization of Arabs, Muslims, and brown people within your. borders, or echoes in the thunder of bombs falling upon them in distant lands, the stance remains unaltered. It is a singular posture, a continuity of spirit that binds the local to the global, the here to the there. This stance, unwavering and resolute, reveals a common thread of oppression — a thread that, regardless of geography, weaves together the stories of subjugation and violence against those deemed other.
This introspection leads to an uncomfortable truth about these liberals: the liberalism they profess is a privilege, a garment worn with exclusivity, extended only to those deemed worthy of humanity. It is a selective liberalism, conditional and bounded, a travesty of the very ideals it purports to uphold.
In this light, the struggle for Palestinian liberation becomes not just a fight against an external oppressor but also a battle against an internal contradiction, a hypocrisy within the ranks of those who claim to stand for justice and equality. This is the dilemma at the heart of the matter — the reckoning with a liberalism that is, for some, only skin deep.
To support the Palestinian Children’s Relief Fund, click here: https://pcrf1.app.neoncrm.com/forms/gaza-relief
This piece is so powerful, my friend. This paragraph right here:
“It is as if to say, by some dark logic, that speaking against a right-wing government is to invoke the specter of hatred against all Jewish people. This is a dangerous and duplicitous game. Similar to saying that criticism of the Trump or Biden administrations is inherently tied to hatred of all white Americans. It blurs the line between political discourse and ethnic vilification, between the actions of a state and the identity of a people. In this narrative, dissent becomes sacrilege, and the critic, no matter how reasoned or compassionate their argument, is rendered a bigot.”
Amen. 🙏
Just like the United States, Israel portrays itself as a “just and diverse democracy” but in reality Israel was giving contraceptive shots to Jewish Ethiopians who immigrated to Israel 2012 without their knowledge. The racist agendas in an apartheid state with a United States “unconditional” tax dollar backing needs some light.
Thank you Fred for your GREAT WORK!!! I love it!