Youth and the Internet – Why Calling Israel Criticism Antisemitism Doesn’t Help
Unfortunately, Israel has lost the PR war. In the wake of the most devastating attack on Jews in nearly a century, Israel should have higher support than ever before; instead, poll after poll shows that support for Israel is declining, especially from younger people. Why is this happening?
I believe the answer has a lot to do with both the Internet and the political realignment happening in the country. Arguably, the two are related, so they aren’t necessarily separate phenomena. Regardless, both of these factors are creating new communities and echo chambers, which results in disparate worldviews amongst everyone, but especially amongst the young people who frequently spend more and more time online. These communities tend to be anti-Israel, for alleged different reasons. In response to their criticisms of the Jewish state, pro-Israel supporters frequently accuse these groups of antisemitism. Whether or not this is true is mostly irrelevant – the response does not help Israel, and, paradoxically, often undermines support for the Jewish state. Considering the declining youth support for Israel, us in the pro-Israel crowd need a new argument, fast.
In my opinion, there are four broad categories of online communities that are currently criticizing Israel. They are: far-leftists, isolationists/libertarians, conspiracy theorists, and centrists. My reason for writing this article is to review each of these groups individually to highlight the fact that referring to any of them as antisemitic is a counter-productive measure.
To start, let’s look at the far-leftists. These are people who already had a great dislike for Israel before October 7th, and often accused it of being an apartheid state. They are almost always critical of groups with power, and criticizing Israel, which has power over the Palestinians, is consistent with this worldview. Jews themselves are regularly involved with these movements. Whether or not antisemitism contributes to the criticism of Israel perpetrated by this group is outside of the scope of this article, but undoubtedly, members of this group, especially the Jewish members, do not believe themselves to be antisemitic.
On the other end of the political spectrum, there are isolationist/libertarians who might not criticize Israel itself, but do criticize the United States’ funding for Israel (think Rand Paul or Thomas Massie). This perspective is especially popular with younger people, who are often opposed to interventionism. The isolationists and leftists are similar in that they have a uniform ideology that is consistent with criticism of the United States’ relationship with Israel. Strap members of either of these groups to a lie detector and put a gun to their head, none of them would admit to antisemitic feelings, as they legitimately do not believe that antisemitism is the source of their Israel criticism (again, the question of whether this is true is unrelated to the larger point).
Referring to the leftists or isolationists as antisemitic will therefore not cause any reflection or re-evaluation of their opinions, it will instead cause them to be offended and shut down. This state is not conducive to convincing someone to support Israel, let alone convincing that person to even listen to alternative arguments. All the claim of bigotry does is motivate group members to move further away from the pro-Israel movement. It also reinforces the belief of these groups that there are no good arguments to support Israel, as pro-Israel advocates spend time labeling them as antisemitic (which the leftists and isolationists truly believe to be false) rather than engaging in analytic criticism of their views.
Next, we have conspiracy theorists, the group perhaps most deserving of the “antisemitism” moniker. Oftentimes, members of this group do not outright blame the Jews, but instead prefer a “just asking questions” approach, where the questions inevitably lead to Jews and/or Israel. While the commentators in this camp do not openly advocate for antisemitism, their communities often do. If any reader has doubts about that last sentence, I advise them to spend five minutes in the comment section on any Candace Owens video about Israel. A favorite line from these communities is “they will call you an antisemite, but never a liar.” Unfortunately, they’re right; pro-Israel advocates will often lean on the antisemitism charge, rather than exposing the lies of the conspiracy theorists. Referring to this camp as antisemitic only reinforces members’ initial assumptions, especially when the charge of antisemitism is not coupled with facts, data, and logic. Especially egregious is the fact that this group usually makes the weakest attacks on Israel – it should be so easy to prove their claims wrong. But when pro-Israel advocates resort to the antisemitism charge instead of arguing on the merit of facts, data, and logic, we lose our one opportunity to show these people to be the idiots they are.
Finally, there are the centrists. This is the mostly silent group – the centrists don’t frequently speak up against Israel, but might occasionally post a “Free Palestine” hashtag or meme, or offhandedly refer to Gaza as a genocide. The famous podcaster Joe Rogan is a great example of this attitude, and likely has influenced others to view Israel in the same light. Members of this group often do not have strong opinions on Israel, or even particularly care about the country, but are usually responding to the general anti-Israel “vibe” seen online. This feeling is compounded by heartbreaking images of Gaza, which often circulate through all corners of the internet. It is easy to see why someone without a stake in Israel would see the images online, feel the “vibe,” and become tacitly anti-Israel.
While frustrating, the centrists are the MOST important group to not call antisemitic, both because it is incredibly harmful to the pro-Israel cause, and because this group has the greatest chance of being convinced to change their minds. The latter part of this claim is obvious – since the centrists do not have strong opinions on Israel, they can be persuaded to believe something else about the Jewish state. The fact that calling members of this group antisemitic is counterproductive might be less intuitive, but is equally true. Most of the centrists criticizing Israel are only responding to a general anti-Israel energy online, without any serious conviction to their criticisms. Referring to these musings as antisemitism pushes the centrists towards the anti-Israel side, forcing the members of this group to align with actual anti-Zionists they would not normally be in contact with. Furthermore, it implies that defenders of Israel do not have good answers to the anti-Israel claims that the centrists see online. Even worse, it makes the pro-Israel side seem like part of an establishment that young people are increasingly distrustful of.
Therefore, it is not useful to call members of any of the aforementioned groups antisemitic. A great case study for these points is the recent primary election of Zohran Mamdani. Mamdani would likely fall into the “far-leftist” category discussed and was frequently cited as the quintessential antisemite for his anti-Israel comments. Undoubtedly, voters who shared similar sentiments as Mamdani also felt personally attacked when Mamdani was accused of antisemitism for sharing ideas they agreed with. Whether or not Mamdani and his supporters truly are antisemitic does not change the fact that these attacks totally failed. Mamdani won a striking victory, in large part due to young people who likely frequent the online communities discussed above. Clearly, if the pro-Israel side wants to win over the under-30 crowd, a change in strategy is absolutely necessary. My proposal is to shift the focus to attacking the anti-Israel arguments, rather than the people. The arguments are much easier to prove wrong.
