Hasan Doesn’t Get to Decide Which Jews Deserve Safety

Let me begin with something that should not be remotely controversial: Benjamin Netanyahu has done catastrophic damage to Israel.

I am not a Netanyahu supporter. I believe his government has helped destroy Israel’s standing around the world, prolonged unimaginable suffering in Gaza, empowered extremists, and made Israelis and Palestinians less safe. His political survival has repeatedly appeared to matter more to him than peace, democracy, or Israel’s long-term future.

As a progressive Jew, I refuse to pretend otherwise.

But my disgust with Netanyahu does not require me to become a huge fan of Hasan Piker. It certainly does not require me to ignore rhetoric that treats violence against American Jews as the predictable consequence of Jews having the wrong opinions.

During a recent livestream, Piker said that if American Jews continue presenting themselves as “singularly invested in Israel,” then “eventually someone is going to come around and take action, not against the State of Israel, mind you, but against American Jews.”

Piker has defended his comments as a warning, not a threat. But that distinction does not rescue the statement. When you tell a minority group that violence will eventually be directed at them because of how members of that group speak, organize, or identify, you are making their safety conditional.

You are telling Jews that if they do not want to be attacked, they had better distance themselves from Israel in a way you find acceptable.

That is victim-blaming dressed up as political analysis.

The liberal antisemitism watchdog Nexus Project responded exactly as it should have: “A Jewish person’s stance on Israel (or any issue) isn’t an invitation to violence.” The organization added that people who attack Jews are making a choice and that blaming victims or presenting violence as inevitable is unacceptable. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries likewise called the suggestion that American Jews are inviting violence against themselves “dangerous and antisemitic.” The Associated Press reported on the controversy and Piker’s defense of his remarks.⁠

They are right.

Progressives should understand this better than anyone. We do not tell Muslim Americans that Islamophobic attacks are an inevitable response to terrorism committed by people thousands of miles away. We do not tell Asian Americans that violence against them is the foreseeable consequence of China’s policies. We do not tell immigrants that xenophobic attacks are the natural result of an immigration debate.

At least, we should not.

The entire progressive project is built on rejecting collective guilt. It is built on the principle that human rights do not depend on whether the majority approves of someone’s identity, religion, affiliations, or political beliefs.

That principle must include Jews.

American Jews are not a monolith. Some enthusiastically support the current Israeli government. Many support Israel’s existence while despising Netanyahu. Some are non-Zionists or anti-Zionists. Some feel deeply connected to Israel but are horrified by the war. Others have little connection to the country at all.

Every one of them deserves protection from antisemitic violence.

The progressive answer cannot be that the “good Jews” will be safe as long as we loudly condemn Israel, while the “bad Jews” should have anticipated what might happen to them. Jewish safety is not a prize awarded for ideological compliance.

I support a two-state future, oppose the occupation, despise the extremists Netanyahu has elevated, and believe the devastation in Gaza demands moral clarity rather than excuses. None of that makes me responsible for the actions of Israel’s government. And if another Jew holds views considerably more conservative than mine, that person still does not become a legitimate target for violence.

This should be easy.

Criticizing Israel is not inherently antisemitic. Calling for Palestinian freedom is not inherently antisemitic. Condemning Netanyahu is not inherently antisemitic. Opposing Israeli military policy is not inherently antisemitic.

Blaming Jews for antisemitism because they remain connected to Israel is antisemitic. Suggesting that attacks on American Jews are a foreseeable consequence of Jewish political advocacy crosses a line. The fact that the speaker considers himself progressive does not erase that line.

The American left has rightly spent years warning that words matter. Dehumanizing language creates permission structures. Victim-blaming helps aggressors rationalize their choices. Describing violence as inevitable makes it sound less like an atrocity and more like the natural conclusion of a political disagreement. Those lessons cannot disappear when Jews are the targets.

We also need to stop acting as though acknowledging left-wing antisemitism somehow helps Netanyahu. Netanyahu does not own the fight against antisemitism. Right-wing organizations that weaponize accusations of antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism of Israel do not own it either.

In fact, progressives should be leading this fight precisely because we understand that criticism of a government and hatred of a people are fundamentally different things.

We can reject the cynical claim that every criticism of Israel is antisemitic while also rejecting the equally dishonest claim that antisemitism disappears when it is spoken in the language of anti-imperialism.

We can confront more than one moral failure at a time.

Netanyahu’s government has caused immense harm. Palestinian civilians deserve safety, freedom, dignity, and a future. Israelis deserve leaders who care more about peace than political survival. American Jews deserve to participate in political life without being warned that their relationship with Israel could eventually bring violence upon them.

Hasan Piker does not get a pass because he positions himself on the left. No influencer, activist, candidate, or commentator should.
My fellow Jews do not need to agree with me about Netanyahu. They do not need to pass anyone’s political purity test.
Whether they march against the Israeli government, defend it, or wrestle privately with Israel, they are my fellow Jews.

Their safety is not negotiable.

Anyone who attacks them is responsible for that choice. Not Netanyahu. Not Israel. Not the victims.