Hijacked Ideals

How Antizionism and Intersectionality Are Weaponized

If you’re new to the Middle East conflict, terms like “occupation,” “apartheid,” or “intersectionality” might sound academic or confusing. These concepts, originally intended to clarify or unite, have been manipulated by nefarious interest groups to spread disinformation and fuel hate, particularly to serve the agenda of Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organization known for its genocidal ideology, extreme violence, and the brutal October 7, 2023, massacre of Israeli civilians. This article provides a clear, rational analysis of how two well-meaning ideas — antizionist critiques and intersectionality — have been distorted into tools of division, duping well-intentioned NGOs into supporting terrorist agendas. These organizations, misled by a lack of comprehension of the facts, blanket ideology, and lazy thinking, have turned entities meant for love and equality into agents of hate without even realizing it, losing supporters and donors in the process.

Antizionist Rhetoric: A Web of Lies

Antizionism is the belief that Israel, as a Jewish state, should not exist, the implicit meaning of which reverts Jews to the days of persecution and slaughter. In this narrative, terms like occupation, apartheid, settler-colonialism, ethnic cleansing, nakba, and genocide are not standalone descriptors but a constructed system, each term reinforcing the others to portray Israel as intrinsically wrong. Antizionism has become such an item of faith in some circles that it has taken on cult-like characteristics, mirroring the zealotry seen in the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and other social movements that began with noble intentions but descended into nightmares.

How It Works

Consider the claim that Israel “occupies” Palestinian land. One might initially think of specific areas like Judea and Samaria, but in antizionist rhetoric, “occupation” often extends to the entirety of Israel, annulling its legitimacy. This leads to further accusations:

Apartheid falsely labels Israel as inherently racist, misapplying a term from South Africa’s history to a democracy where all citizens, Jews, Arabs, LGBTQIA, and every minority participate equally in governance and judiciary roles.

Settler-colonialism frames Jewish presence as an invasive theft, overlooking the 5000-year historical presence of a persecuted people in their ancestral land. Zionism is, in fact, a decolonial movement.

Ethnic cleansing accuses Israel of deliberately displacing Palestinians, ignoring that Arab leaders in 1948 encouraged flight to facilitate a later invasion to murder Jews in their entirety, while 900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries in response to Israel’s establishment.

Nakba (Arabic for “catastrophe,” referring to 1948 displacement) adds emotional weight, omitting the context of Arab aggression and the parallel Jewish refugee crisis. The catastrophe is that the Arab population rejected partition then and have refused every peace deal since.

Genocide is the extreme endpoint, accusing Jews of the crime they endured in the Holocaust. This is a follow-up to the lost ability to charge Jews with deicide, an opportunist rebranding of hate to cloak it in legitimacy. Such fundamentalist obsessions with ideology, as history shows with past revolutions, never end well, and this one will not either.

These terms are not based on evidence or reasoned analysis but are emotionally charged to construct a narrative where Israel’s existence is a crime. Reports from organizations like Amnesty International often transition from one accusation to another, presenting Israel as a catastrophic moral failing that requires elimination.

Why It’s Effective

This system operates on emotion rather than logic, drawing individuals into a narrative that resists scrutiny. A person might begin with a specific policy critique, but the interconnected terms make it difficult to avoid broader condemnation. As activists and self-proclaimed experts repeat these claims, even cautious observers may adopt the view that Israel is inherently flawed. Some antizionists moderate their language, likely due to concerns about being labeled antisemitic, but repetition erodes this restraint, leading them to rationalize the narrative as factual.

The Result

This creates a closed system where questioning any term feels like challenging the entire framework. The objective is not to understand the complex history of Israel and Palestine but to promote a one-sided view that fuels division. Nefarious groups exploit this cult-like fervor, turning well-meaning individuals into unwitting tools of hate.

Intersectionality: Duped into Supporting Terror

Intersectionality, a concept with noble origins, has been similarly distorted. As a gay, Jewish immigrant who had to escape South Africa for my participation in the liberation struggle, enduring years of deprivation after fleeing my prior homeland, my life exemplifies intersectionality — reflecting the interplay of race, sexuality, and faith. This section examines how this idea was meant to unite and how it has been co-opted to serve Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group that would murder the very people now unwittingly advocating for it.

What Intersectionality Was Meant to Be

In 1989, Kimberlé Crenshaw introduced “intersectionality” to describe how oppressions — such as racism, sexism, or homophobia — overlap. For instance, my experience as a gay Jew from Africa highlights unique challenges, and the concept aimed to foster solidarity among marginalized groups — women, people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals — to advance justice inclusively.

How It’s Been Twisted

Nefarious interest groups have manipulated intersectionality to push an anti-Israel agenda, incorporating Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organization with a genocidal charter targeting Jews and oppressing dissenters. Well-meaning NGOs, focused on causes like trans rights, racial justice, or women’s empowerment, have been deceived into adopting this narrative, appearing foolish and losing support. For example:

• Activists assert that supporting trans rights requires opposing Israel, linking the two under a vague “fight against oppression.” This overlooks Israel’s progressive LGBTQ+ policies, contrasting with Hamas’s persecution of gays in Gaza, and widespread persecution of LGBTQIA in all of Arabia. Yet these groups end up endorsing a terrorist entity that would kill them, over a democracy that would protect them. It makes no rational sense.
• Connecting unrelated issues, like U.S. racial justice to the Palestinian cause, frames Israel as the sole “oppressor,” excusing Hamas’s violence — rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and the October 7 massacre — as “resistance,” despite its explicit genocidal intent.

How NGOs Got Fooled

Innocent NGOs, such as those advocating for climate change or gender equality, have been misled by these manipulative forces into echoing anti-Israel rhetoric. They’ve accepted the flawed premise that all struggles align with opposing Israel, inadvertently supporting Hamas’s agenda. Examples include:

• A women’s rights group joining an anti-Israel rally, believing it’s for justice, yet promoting a terrorist group that enforces patriarchal oppression in Gaza, punishing women for minor defiance.
• An LGBTQ+ advocacy group criticizing Israel while ignoring Hamas’s execution of gay individuals, swayed by a narrative that targets Israel exclusively.

These NGOs, failing to comprehend the facts, relying on blanket ideology, and exhibiting lazy thinking, have transformed organizations meant for love and equality into agents of hate without even realizing it. Their supporters and donors, appalled by this shift, have withdrawn support. I feel sorrow for their irreparable damage — years of lost funding will reflect in their future fundraising results, a consequence of their inadequate due diligence.

Why This Misuse Is Devastating

This distortion turns intersectionality into a tool for division. Instead of supporting all marginalized groups, including Jews facing antisemitism, it singles out Israel, rationalizing Hamas’s violence. This terrorist group, which would eliminate feminists, gays, trans individuals, and liberals — the very constituencies these NGOs claim to represent — has become their unintended ally, placing them in service to their own destruction.

The Common Thread: Manipulation by Nefarious Forces

Both antizionist rhetoric and the misuse of intersectionality demonstrate how good ideas are exploited. Antizionism constructs a narrative to delegitimize Israel, while intersectionality, intended to unite, is twisted by nefarious groups to align unrelated causes with Hamas’s terrorist agenda, misleading NGOs into self-sabotage.

Why It Matters

Both rely on emotional manipulation, repetition, and lack of evidence, creating environments where questioning the narrative is discouraged. NGOs, intending to promote justice, become tools for Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group that would target its own advocates — feminists, gays, trans individuals, liberals. The impact includes:

Antizionist rhetoric fosters division by portraying Israel as inherently wrong, justifying hostility and violence.

Misused intersectionality undermines advocacy groups, eroding their credibility and support while serving a terrorist cause.

What Can We Do?

The Middle East conflict is complex, with challenges on all sides. To counter this manipulation:

• Demand evidence: When terms like “genocide” or claims linking trans rights to opposing Israel arise, consult primary sources, such as Hamas’s charter or Israel’s legal framework.
• Seek balance: Recognize the legitimate struggles of both Palestinians and Israelis, avoiding narratives that excuse terrorism.
• Reject deception: Objective thinkers should despise the nefarious forces manipulating NGOs. Justice requires criticizing all oppressors, including Hamas, not just Israel.
• Reclaim intersectionality: It should support all marginalized groups — Jews, LGBTQ+ individuals, women — without being co-opted for terrorist agendas.

A Personal Plea

As a gay, Jewish immigrant who fled South Africa’s oppression for my role in the liberation struggle, I’ve endured exile, deprivation, and the weight of intersecting identities. My life embodies the promise of intersectionality — a principle now betrayed by the very organizations it once inspired.

NGOs, built on the generosity of Jewish and liberal communities, have veered into hypocrisy. Some now exclude Jewish groups from events like Montreal’s Pride Parade, wielding stereotypes and casting collective guilt on their founding allies. This betrayal is not only immoral — it’s strategic suicide. Vilified and sidelined, these communities will withdraw their support, and the financial fallout will cripple these organizations for years to come.

Donors must rigorously evaluate their charitable recipients, funding only those aligned with their values. Many NGOs have been co-opted, morphing into unwitting conduits of division and hate. Those that stray from their mission — even if misled — may warrant IRS scrutiny for potential revocation of their charitable tax status. Accountability is not optional; it is essential.

Organizations must confront their drift, interrogate their trajectory, and reject destructive ideologies. Failure risks not only their relevance but the very principles they claim to uphold.

Justice demands nuance. It demands courage. And above all, it demands that we refuse to let the language of liberation be hijacked by those who would silence, oppress, or destroy.