How progressive politics turned some Jews against Zionism
In New York, the putative capital of Jewish America, few developments better illustrate the erosion of Jewish support for Israel and Zionism than the candidacy of Brad Lander. Lander, a self-proclaimed “proud Jew,” is running for Congress while openly embracing narratives that portray Israel as a genocidal, apartheid state.
He has condemned Israel’s war against Hezbollah terrorism for the “immense suffering and displacement endured by the Lebanese people,” yet has offered scarcely a word about the devastation inflicted on civilians in Northern Israel living under relentless rocket fire. He refused to march in the Salute to Israel Parade, routinely hides behind the worn distinction of merely opposing “Netanyahu,” treats AIPAC as a malign political force, and opposes providing Israel with offensive weapons. Unsurprisingly, he is also an enthusiastic ally and supporter of anti-Israel New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Lander’s pandering to the false moral narratives of the progressive left is hardly an isolated phenomenon among Jewish Americans. Nor is it unexpected. Research conducted at the Jerusalem Center for Foreign Affairs dating back to before 2020 consistently identified a substantial bloc of self-identified Jews expressing entrenched hostility toward Israel while simultaneously shielding themselves behind the rhetorical cover of speaking “as a Jew.” The passionate ignorance displayed by many liberals and progressives regarding Israel has become a routine feature of the modern political landscape. Yet when that ignorance extends deeply into segments of the Jewish community itself, it becomes more than merely ironic; it demands explanation. When our findings repeatedly showed that many Jews would prefer voting for someone like Rashida Tlaib or Ilhan Omar over a moderate, pro-Israel Republican, it became clear that a deeper understanding was needed of how ideology shapes cognition, overrides evidence, and drives political behavior.
What emerges is a form of ideological conformity in which adherence to progressive orthodoxy demands submission to rigid anti-Israel assumptions. These activists insist that they oppose Zionism — or merely aspects of it or of Israeli “policy” – rather than Israel or Judaism itself. In theory, such a distinction can exist. In practice, however, many who obsessively oppose Zionism exhibit little genuine regard for Jewish identity or Jewish continuity, even while comfortably participating in superficial cultural expressions of Jewishness. For some Jews, opposition to Zionism takes on a distinctly phobic quality. Unlike many fashionable “phobias” casually invoked in contemporary political-social discourse, anti-Zionist Jews may genuinely harbor an irrational fear of Zionism itself.
Zionism represents nationalism, a cardinal offense within much of progressive ideology. It affirms Jewish self-determination and the Jewish historical claim to a specific homeland — another violation of postmodern anti-colonial dogma. For some Jews, Zionism intensifies anxieties surrounding dual loyalty and threatens their understanding of themselves primarily as Americans. For some within insular religious communities, Zionism is viewed as the secular corruption of a purely religious ideal and therefore a danger to communal separation and cultural continuity.
The claim that such behavior merely reflects opposition to specific Israeli policies – rather than opposition to Israel itself – collapses under even minimal scrutiny. Likewise, the familiar insistence that the hostility is directed only at the current Israeli government, or at Benjamin Netanyahu personally, ignores the political reality that emerged after October 7. Israel remains deeply divided on many domestic questions, often bitterly so. Yet on the central issues that dominate progressive attacks against the Jewish state – the false accusations of apartheid, genocide, deliberate starvation, and illegitimacy in defending itself against Hezbollah and Iran – there exists an extraordinary degree of national consensus that cuts across party, ideological, and social lines. Opposition to those libels is not uniquely “Netanyahu’s position”; it is overwhelmingly Israel’s position.
When false political narratives cast support for Israel and Zionism as incompatible with one’s core ideological identity, the conditions for irrational fear are created. Progressive Jewish hostility toward Israel stems from the fear that Jewish identity itself might distance one from the shallow but mandatory ideological tropes demanded by progressive politics. This opposition is rooted less in knowledge or moral clarity than in ideological and psychological insecurity. It is irrational, and fundamentally driven by fear. For many progressive Jews, and for many Jews trapped within the fierce cluelessness of anti-Israel dogma, the condition can most accurately be described as an irrational fear of Zionism itself. It is Zionophobia.
The author would like to thank Abe Edery for his helpful comments on this paper.