There are some good observations here - the purity tests surely kept this from becoming a bigger movement - but there are a ton of problems with this piece.
First and foremost, it's just wrong that that the movement was on the doorstep of winning. The protests captured the world's attention but didn't get us to the brink of a ceasefire as Wayne claims. The link he provides as evidence is from 5 months after the period he is talking about and doesn't say what he claims it does.
Second, Wayne just ignores that we live in a time of complete and total surveillance thanks to social media. His claims at the movement was violent are based on a couple of people saying stupid things. There have been, and always will be, people saying stupid things in movements. The difference is that now anything said by any person in a movement can get seized upon and amplified by a movements opponents in a way that was never possible before. The kind of message discipline that is required to keep everyone in a large movement from saying something stupid that it's opponents can seize upon is frankly impossible.
It is also weird to hold up extinction rebellion - of which I am a fan - as a model of success. I'm not exactly sure what they've achieved. And Wayne doesn't bother to make a case.
Finally, I'm not sure how anyone can look at the unrelenting genocidal intentions of Israel and the United States, or the relentless push towards fascism in the first 2 months of the new Trump administration, and claim that the reason students are being disappeared right now is because of violent rhetoric. It seems infinitely more likely to me that the crackdown is happening because of the students' success - to make an example of them to terrify anyone from dissenting against anything Trump does - rather than their failures.
Thanks for this feedback. Some great points for sure.
I may overstate the success of Free Palestine, but they mobilized nearly 1 million in London alone, and it was surely one of the largest global mobilizations in history -- with peak mobilization in key cities (NYC, London) on a scale that has not been seen in recent history. Was much accomplished with that power? I would argue not.
Re: random things said by random people, these were student leaders and orgs at the most important mobilization site of the movement: Columbia. For sure, even movement leaders are diverse, but was there any groundswell to support nonviolence in the face of the CUAD's statements that "violence was the ONLY path forward"? I saw none, and the primary reason was purity tests. I know people kicked out of organizing simply for suggesting an alternative to violent messaging.
XR was successful in some ways, not in others. But compared to Free Palestine, if you asked one year after XR's initial rebellion, had they achieved their goals? In no small part, yes. The UK government had declared a climate emergency, and those with political power who were promoting fossil fuels were on the rocks. XR's problem was sustaining success, not a complete lack of success.
Finally, I'm certainly not assigning blame to anyone, certainly not nonviolent protesters being swept up. But movements do need to think about what we can do strategically to respond most effectively to repression. There is a moment now for the Free Palestine movement to do that. Let's see if they do.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Super thoughtful, and you make very sound points that are worth considering.
Appreciate the thoughtful response and I don't mean that as a throwaway line. I *never* comment online and am only doing so because I have so much respect for you and have learned a lot from you.
On XR vs. Free Palestine. Both have had similar success - at the rhetorical level. XR was able to get the UK government to declare a climate emergency. Free Palestine has been able to get many to declare what is happening a genocide and war crimes. Both have not had success on larger goals - "a just transition" or a ceasefire (let alone a Free Palestine). So I don't think you're really comparing apples-to-apples in declaring one a success and the other a failure.
I think the other thing your piece and comment are missing is that Power (state and corporate interests) learn from the very same social movements that you have. We don't have a draft anymore, for instance, because the access to more (often reluctant or disgruntled) bodies for the war machine isn't worth people opposing US foreign policy.
But even more importantly, Power has learned how to leverage the always on outrage machine and surveillance that J Edgar couldn't have even dreamed of to crush movements. Consider the murder of George Floyd. You and I probably disagree on the revolutionary potential of the police station burning down. But I bet we do agree that what that moment evolved into - corporate DEI trainings, pronouns in email signatures, land acknowledgements - was ridiculously milquetoast. And yet that has still led to a massive backlash with enormous and horrendous consequences.
We live on screens now and that has changed the social movement equations. I'm not confident that Bull Conner would engender the same reaction today. Attacking civil rights activists might just be outrage porn for people on both sides for a few days before they moved onto the next outrage.
Finally, lots of grandparents out there (including my parents!) out there advocating for Palestine. Just not enough people of age between the students and the grandparents. But that is true of every US movement I've ever witnessed so don't think you can blame protest tactics or strategy for that.
Some of the points you make have some truth in them, but you are missing the fact that AIPAC and CUFI are culturally and politically ingrained. Some of the more derisive comments made by so-called pro Palestinian activists were controlled opposition. Now that trump is president, authoritarianism is the order of the day here in America, while mass genocide is STILL the order in Gaza. It seems you think the movement is over; It is not, but this administration is a danger to all activists. As a 59yr old vegan and pro-human rights, I won't give up on the Palestinians. Or Yemenis. You shouldn't either.
Definitely not giving up on anything! And I agree there are violent plants in every movement. We've seen a lot of them in animal rights! Have you heard of Thomas Jones and the SeaWorld fiasco?
I read your article with interest, and while I appreciate your analysis of social movements, I must strongly disagree with some of your conclusions, particularly regarding the idea of movement convergence and the Free Palestine cause itself.
The Problem with Movement Convergence
The idea of "movement convergence" is often proposed as a strategic advantage, yet in practice, it is always one-sided. Animal rights activists are constantly encouraged to support other social causes—LGBTQ rights, racial justice, feminism, and, as you discuss, Free Palestine. But the reverse never happens. Not once have we seen feminist organizations, LGBTQ activists, or anti-racist movements take a stand for the most oppressed beings on Earth: animals.
This asymmetry is not just unfair; it is a disastrous waste of resources for the animal rights movement. While activists for other causes benefit from solidarity, the animal movement receives nothing in return. And yet, among all causes, it is the most urgent, the most severe in scale, affecting trillions of sentient beings suffering and dying every second in an industry fully legitimized by society. Every moment spent on unrelated causes is a moment lost for those who need it the most.
The Fallacy of the "Free Palestine" Movement
Your article critiques Free Palestine for its strategic mistakes, but the movement’s fundamental flaw is even more profound: it is built on selective outrage. The world is filled with occupied, persecuted, and even genocided populations—Tibetans under China, Kurds spread across hostile nations, Yazidis massacred by ISIS, Ukrainians facing brutal invasion. Yet, Free Palestine activists never mobilize for them. Why? Because their fight is not about universal justice; it is about a narrow political agenda against one specific country: Israel.
Worse, this movement ignores the real culprit behind Gaza’s misery: Hamas. It was not Israel but Hamas that launched an unprovoked massacre on October 7, burning babies alive, raping Jewish women, and butchering civilians in their homes. No one—absolutely no one—in the Free Palestine movement protested against this. This silence reveals everything: their concern is not for human rights, but for demonizing Israel at all costs.
Now, ironically, the people of Gaza themselves are rising up against Hamas, recognizing their true oppressor. Perhaps, at last, the world will begin to see what many have refused to acknowledge.
Everyone benefits from animal liberation because it reduces blanket ill treatment of animals, a group that includes humans. But not all humans recognize that humans are animals. Various societal liberation movements hold tenets drawn from "creationistic" sources that pose "mankind" as dominator of other species, or as more excellent than other species and entitled to do with others as they please. So while these other movements benefit from animal liberation, they don't see animal liberation as a source of liberation on multiple fronts, or on their particular fronts. They tend to focus on cruelty towards animals as injustice on a human scale, and on "human rights" to rescue from that cruelty. Because they don't engage on the larger field around the human animal, they tend to get locked into oppositions with other human groups, rather than envisioning and building another kind of world for all animals. This extends obviously to the point where opposition humans are referred to as "animals", a word for "damned", "doomed", "prey", "sacrificial victim", etc. I think the Islamic/Judaic, or Palestinian/Israeli, or Arabic/Israeli, lockup is a classic and premier example of this, but it is certainly not the only one.
Why are you writing about something that has absolutely nothing to do with animals? I have wholeheartedly supported your efforts to free animals from their miserable circumstances because they are my priority. I have my own political views regarding Hamas, the Palestinians, and the protests at Columbia but I do not write about them in my newsletters. My grandson, a Jew, attended Columbia and I am grateful that he graduated before the vile protests began. I am a Christian who believes in the existence of the State of Israel and their absolute right to defend themselves against murderous psychopaths who are dedicated to the death of Jews and the destruction of Israel. "Free Palestine" is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel and I abhor the use of that slogan. Palestinian protestors use threats of death of violence in their rhetoric because Palestinians have been all about violence since Jews were allowed once more to live safely in their ancestral home. They were willing to live peacefully side by side with Muslim Arabs in Israel but the Arabs hated the Jews and wanted them gone. The Arab countries surrounding Israel told Arabs to leave Israel because they were going to attack the new Jewish state and drive the Jews into the sea, after which the Arabs could return to their homes. Unfortunately for the Arabs, the Jews won and have been winning ever since against the extremely violently terrorists who now call themselves Palestinians. Palestinians don't want a successful state to flourish in. They proved that in Gaza. They were given billions of dollars in aid, including from Israel, and spent it all on weapons and building tunnels to attack Israel. If Palestinians had cared about living in peace and prosperity in Gaza that could have happened if they wanted it, but they didn't. Israelis made friends with Gazans, hired them to work for them, provided health care for them, and trusted them. On October 7 we saw how that love and trust was returned by Palestinians who are too filled with hatred of Jews to give a damn about anything but causing misery, death and destruction. If you want to support terrorists who have the capacity to murder two little babies and their mother in cold blood, not to mention all the other innocent people they have murdered, then I do not understand you at all. The very least you can do is not allow your opinions about Palestinians to intrude into your work for the animals and alienate people who have supported you.
Hi Britt! Appreciate these thoughts. The primary reason I'm writing about this is because I think there are lessons to learn for animal advocates. Have you gotten a chance to read the blog? I think there are some social scientific insights that animal advocates can apply but would love your thoughts on whether the lessons I'm drawing actually make sense!
You wrote in the article “I remember having a conversation with Dan Kidby (who was then a director at Animal Rising) about the potential for an alliance between animal rights and Free Palestine”
Do you hear yourself when you say “Palestinians have been all about violence”? Aside from the fact that generalizing like that about any group is the definition of xenophobia, Israel was built on the expulsion, mass killings, and ethnic cleansing of indigenous Palestinians to make room for European and other foreign Jews who could not name a single grandparent or ancestor who had so much as stepped foot on Palestine, let alone be native to it. Israeli settlers from the US and other foreign countries continue to illegally occupy more Palestinian lands in the West Bank to this very day. They continue to harass and harm indigenous Palestinians to force them out of their lands, and then land squat and are deluded and ethno-nationalist enough to think that that is their divine right. They are no different than white slave owners and their self-entitlement to the bodies of black slaves in the US. If you want to see what “being all about violence” is like, please take a careful look at the foundations of Israel and its continued violations of international laws and human rights to maintain their artificial country.
The issue of apocalyptic behaviors calling for killing of anyone at all is entirely relevant to the issue of animal liberation, including human liberation and human societal liberations, as far as I am concerned.
All three "religions", Judaism, Christianity and Islam, persuasively if not invasively, have asserted World-ending and Life-ending futures. All three of them accept the killing of one kind of animal or another as a compensation for their individual human vices. They don't list this killing as a vice, but claim to obey a commandment to not kill. Many children are raised swallowing this anomaly and with this illogical program go on to pose claims against eachother and eventually to take lives over those claims.
The paradoxical character of this behavior in their eyes seems to be elevated to the dignity of a miracle and an ethical motor.
The practicical values that Martin Luther King, Feminists, Abolitionists, and Darwinians established are based partly on the quiet and overshadowed promise of freedom that Christianity offers -- the kindness attributed to Jesus Christ, NOT his Old Testament style threatening and NOT the apocalyptic tantrums of some of his "followers".
Ιτ would be great if members of differing and opposing religious parties would come to terms over the perennial and transcendent topic of Spirit --- Spirit writ large that is, that perpetually and openly describes and embraces the origin of all ideas about it, logically and scientifically, in the sense of Thomas Kuhn's idea of paradigm evolution in the sciences.
To me, the idea of Spirit being "the largest of all Animals" would provide a start.
To my mind, the instruction of children in murder to perpetuate a version of "paternity" is the basic character of the religious triad at issue here.
To me, it appears that America, Israel, Hamas, and Britain, as well as other powers, talk, think and act within the context of that triad of scary religious doctrines that teaches its children to accept killing for the honor of that triad. I think that a way out of that is for individual humans to find an individual beyond themselves and beyond the identity religions assign them, an individual that can be identified with by all. That is what is aimed at, though not entirely reached, in terms such as Spirit, Great Spirit, Holy Spirit, and so on. I don't see any reason why this idea should not be identified also with Earth's Biosphere.
Removed Eric Brooks' comments. No problem with disagreement. Personal insults cross the line. I want to encourage discussion here, but some minimal assumptions of good faith are necessary for reasonable discussion. Appreciate everyone's comments with that spirit in mind!
I was disappointed to see the topic of your recent email, which, in my view, promotes nonsense and inadvertently legitimizes a terrorist organization. The group in question has done nothing for animal rights—or human rights, for that matter. In contrast, Israel has made significant and measurable strides in both areas.
The “Free Palestine” movement continues to fail precisely because it aligns itself with extremist groups responsible for violence and suffering. It’s deeply misguided to equate that cause with legitimate organizations working to minimize real suffering—especially the suffering of animals, who are innocent and undeserving of harm.
Please review your information and facts before sharing this kind of nonsense. A basic understanding of the conflict in the Middle East would show that Palestinians, through the actions of their leadership, have brought much of this situation upon themselves. While no one celebrates suffering, ignoring responsibility and context only furthers misinformation.
Hi Steven, I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, which is part of the reason for the post. It's important to not align yourself to violence if you are a nonviolent movement! That's one area where the Free Palestine movement definitely failed.
My goal here is just to draw lessons from the movement, not necessarily to suggest any alliance. Generally speaking, single issue movements seem to be more effective!
The problem with even engaging in debate about this particular movement is that it gives it a sense of legitimacy it hasn’t earned. This isn’t just a controversial or political issue — it’s a movement actively supporting a terrorist organization. That’s not up for debate.
There are many legitimate causes worthy of discussion. But this isn’t one of them. As someone else pointed out, those who are supporting this movement are mistaken — because they will ultimately lose. Israel is not going anywhere. The tragic result of this conflict so far is that Palestinians have lost Gaza — not because of Israel, but because of Hamas.
If these protests were truly about justice, they would be directed at Hamas or Iran. But they’re not. And we’ve seen how powerful narratives can be manipulated. For example, in the animal rights space, the goal is to expose the cruelty of animal agriculture — because it is evil. That’s the truth. And it’s important to draw that distinction. When someone like Kristi Noem parades around as wholesome while glorifying the abuse of animals, it only shows how evil can wear a very polished mask.
The danger is that evil often hides behind a façade — whether it’s in the form of extremist leaders or animal abusers posing as family-friendly farmers. And too often, the general public is easily swayed by these appearances, whether it's rodeos, bullfights, or Hollywood packaging cruelty as entertainment.
But bringing up these anti-Israel protests under the umbrella of legitimate activism does real harm — not just to innocent Palestinians who suffer the consequences of Hamas’s actions, but to Jewish people who have been integral to this country’s progress. Think of the Jewish professors who helped shape your legal education, or the Jewish doctors who treat everyone equally, without prejudice.
What’s deeply concerning is when people who protest against Israel today step into positions of influence tomorrow — as physicians, attorneys, or leaders. There’s a real fear in the Jewish community that their bias won’t stay at the protest — it could follow into their professional decisions. We’ve seen the answer to that before, and it’s not encouraging.
As an animal rights activist, though, you are amazing. I — along with many other Jews — support DXE wholeheartedly, both financially and emotionally. The animal rights movement is a beautiful, inspiring, and righteous cause. But this issue should not be conflated with it. They are not the same.
I admire your analysis usually greatly and I learn so much - however, think there are many glaring blind spots in this analysis and there is much we can learn actually from this movement. I'm traveling and on deadlines, but when back will attempt to unpack them. The most striking ones is the global Palestine movements is non-violent (altho the media etc misinforms us on this) and the scale of the repression only speaks to the fact the movement is working. The light has been shone on the horrors of the occupation and the genocide. The TikTok attempted ban was about this and the polling of the younger generation speak to this. South African Apartheid didn't end it a day. The movement wasn't over when there were arrests. It took decades, as will this, but one day Palestine will be free, as will, inshallah, all animals.
As Ta Nehisi Coates said in his recent press tour, you are either against apartheid or you're not. You are against occupation or not. You are either against the killing of what is likely hundreds of thousands of innocent civilans, 50% of whom are children, or you dehumanise them and you are not and the pain of others doesn't matter. You either believe they are our children or you do not. You believe 1 life is worth perhaps 100 others (as Albright did when she said the quiet part out loud and that killing 500K Iraqi childen was worth it). BDS is working as it did in S Africa.
It's actually simple. We can finally see the horrors for ourselves and most of the planet stands firmly against this. See the all the countries' votes at the UN. The US may be the main funder of this genocide, but it does not reflect that the movement is a global one.
Hi Wayne, I agree with almost everything you wrote here. The only thing I disagree with is how you characterized the Columbia protesters asking for food/water. They had people willing to bring them food, but the school was arresting people for doing so and blocking other students from using their meal plans even when they weren't occupying the building.
I want to contribute to this conversation, and I have the following things to add.
There is a lot of difference between the goals of the Free Palestine (what that means varies a whole lot to different people) and the Animal Rights movement. Animal rights is essentially saying that we should stop killing and abusing animals. Free Palestine could mean: Allow West Bank/Gaza to have their own state, allow Palestinians to have equal rights to Israelis in 1 state, all the way to violently expelling the Israelis (which happened to many Palestinians in 1948). The problem here is, not all activists in this movement want the same thing. This inherently makes it hard to bring people in, as they do not know what they are being brought into.
Now, we could draw a parallel here to how we want to end animal testing, ban factory farming, and eventually stop animal agriculture entirely. But we take this in stages with the end goal in mind and are transparent that we want all of this. Not all Free Palestine activists want to expel Israelis, and the ones that do, say it in concealed ways. That is why "From the River to the Sea" is a loaded statement.
There is also a very long and complicated history to Palestine, and I have participated in conversations with people who discredit my opinion about this if they determine that they know more about it than I do. It is also very difficult for marketing purposes if the goal is not simple and clear. Most people do not want a history lesson, they want to stop seeing children exploded and to see these children live long and happy lives with political freedom.
I think something that you could've touched on more, is that the opposition facing the Palestinians is much more violent than we face as vegans. Maybe you have heard about the documentary "No Other Land" that recently won an Oscar (this film highlights non-violent activism). One of the directors of the film was threatened with rape for making the film, and was recently bloodily beaten and kidnapped. Now, some vegans have really harsh things said to them, but there isn't a camp similar to Sde Teiman where vegan activists are raped for their activism. Things like this anger people a lot.
There is also an advantage to the vegan movement, given that it is inherently non-violent. Non-violence is the entire point of veganism. I say this to say that it isn't as if vegans are smarter and respect social science, we are fighting a different fight. Many of the organizers would not describe themselves as peace activists.
In any event may we be compassionate to all those who are suffering.
Thanks, Wayne. As always, you have offered us plenty to think about. I believe that our empathy for animals must be linked to our empathy for human beings being maimed and killed in war.
How should nonviolent movments respond to the violence of the Police and larger agencies?
Frankly even if the protests were largely nonviolent they'd still be attacked and people arrested.
Is allowing police or zionists into your movement not a risk of having your movement undercut or even destroyed? Do you think Israeli apartheid and occupation will just be given up peacefully?
And just as a note the struggle against apartheid in south africa feature armed struggle so to did ending british occupation in most of Ireland. Would you describe those as unsuccessful? what about the revolutions in Cuba or Vientnam?
And in reality, the pro-Palestinian protests HAVE been non-violent for the most part until outside agitators or law enforcement come in and stir chaos and cause violence. I don’t know why we’re going after a movement that is simply against war crimes and apartheid, when the movement is being actively targeted by several powerful parties (exhibit a essentially the entire federal government). The argument here asking the pro-Palestinian movement be nonviolent feels kind of ridiculous when the protests have been largely non-violent. The only violence I can think of is potentially the violence against buildings owned by weapons companies, which, well, what are we doing here. I’m seeing other comments entirely brainwashed by state propaganda implying that Palestinians deserve what is happening to them, and really? Again, what are we doing here? A teen born under active occupation deserves to be bombed to death? An infant deserves to be maimed? I think there are valid points to make against the current state of the pro-Palestinian movement but I’m not finding much here. And to the point that animal rights activists shouldn’t support this movement or others because it’s a 2-way street, this stuff isn’t transactional. Human lives, just like wildlife live, aren’t to be supported and advocated for only if they benefit us or our beliefs. And objectively, people won’t focus on animal rights and environmentalism until their basic needs are met, unfortunately. Until we live in an equitable society everywhere around the globe, people fighting for animal rights must support positions on human rights for all, whether it’s for Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank or in America being disappeared by DHS/ICE, LGBTQ folks and activists, climate change and animal rights advocates, BLM or Native American rights actions, anti-war movements in Sudan, Congo, Ukraine. This is the time to be united on all fronts. I don’t know if that makes sense or if this sounds too aggressive, I just can’t read something like this right after seeing university students my age indefinitely detained or devastated 5 year old children who have just lost their entirely family or homes and have nothing left. Who have only experienced war and injustice. I think we can do better here.
An important point to be made is that non-violent movements that face violence from the police or other groups will face more violence if they use violence themselves. It doesn't make people safer to use violence, quite the opposite actually. If you are concerned about activist safety, non violence is the best way.
Now there is another conversation about effectiveness and if non-violent resistance better than violent resistance. I think it depends on the context and exact circumstances. Within the US in 2025, I strongly believe that non-violent resistance is more effective
I'm surprised by this, Wayne. There are plenty of problems with the pro-Palestine movement, and like any movement there are plenty of idiots and grandstanders in it. But to attribute the movement's "failure" entirely to not conforming to your model of activism seems arrogant and narrow-minded.
Much of your evidence is based in a couple of dumb viral moments. The Finkelstein confrontation was stupid but hardly indicative of the movement as a whole, which has platformed Norm again and again. The "Zionists don't deserve to live" was likewise offensive and stupid, but to claim that that's characteristic of the movement seems like willing participation in the political campaign to discredit it. AR activists say dumb shit sometimes, too. Would you agree with me if I wrote a post cherry picking the dumbest thing some self-glorifying AR radical has ever said and suggested it means the AR movement embraces violence? Would you find it fair for me to say that the FBI's repression of non-violent activism by DxE is actually the AR movement's fault because some dipshit once called for violence in defense of animals?
You also entirely ignore the violent rhetoric coming from the other side. Are you going to write a post on the pro-Israel movement, and the people within it who have called for turning Gaza into a parking lot and suggested that there are no innocents among them? How will you reconcile that criticism with the obvious success of the pro-Israel movement on almost every level? You can't have it both ways.
It seems like an odd time to criticize protesters for masking. In an ideal world, I agree that the masks look menacing and cowardly and it's much better optics to show your face. But the Trump administration is now snatching up protesters off the street for writing op-eds. Obviously there's a real security purpose for concealing your identity, it isn't just larping and "safetyism."
And then I find it the height of irony to criticize the "purity politics" of the pro-Palestinian movement by quoting a leader from ... Extinction Rebellion? I don't know how or why you consider XR to be "unusually successful," but most of what I hear about their actions blocking freeways and subway trains etc. is how much they infuriate the everyday people they need to win over and turn them against the climate movement. Seriously inconveniencing and disrupting the daily lives of regular working people to scold them into paying attention to your issue seems like the very definition of patronizing "purity politics" to me.
Lastly, have you been to a pro-Palestinian protest? Not sure how you think they're alienating Jews, when half the people who attend them are Jewish, they do shabbat services, etc. Obviously pro-Israel Jews are alienated, but that's like saying the AR movement is doing a terrible job being inclusive of McDonald's executives.
The most remarkable thing though about your analysis is how you're completely ignoring the overwhelming campaign of government repression this movement has faced, which has now culminated in revoking visas at the arbitrary discretion of Marco Rubio and putting an academic department into receivership. Do you think it's at all possible that the pro-Palestinian movement has not been successful in restraining Israel because it's been utterly demonized to the point where regular Americans literally think that college kids are Hamas-loving genocidal terrorists, and has been the target of a whole-of-government crusade to annihilate it, the single-minded obsession of which we haven't seen in this country since McCarthyism?
There are some good observations here - the purity tests surely kept this from becoming a bigger movement - but there are a ton of problems with this piece.
First and foremost, it's just wrong that that the movement was on the doorstep of winning. The protests captured the world's attention but didn't get us to the brink of a ceasefire as Wayne claims. The link he provides as evidence is from 5 months after the period he is talking about and doesn't say what he claims it does.
Second, Wayne just ignores that we live in a time of complete and total surveillance thanks to social media. His claims at the movement was violent are based on a couple of people saying stupid things. There have been, and always will be, people saying stupid things in movements. The difference is that now anything said by any person in a movement can get seized upon and amplified by a movements opponents in a way that was never possible before. The kind of message discipline that is required to keep everyone in a large movement from saying something stupid that it's opponents can seize upon is frankly impossible.
It is also weird to hold up extinction rebellion - of which I am a fan - as a model of success. I'm not exactly sure what they've achieved. And Wayne doesn't bother to make a case.
Finally, I'm not sure how anyone can look at the unrelenting genocidal intentions of Israel and the United States, or the relentless push towards fascism in the first 2 months of the new Trump administration, and claim that the reason students are being disappeared right now is because of violent rhetoric. It seems infinitely more likely to me that the crackdown is happening because of the students' success - to make an example of them to terrify anyone from dissenting against anything Trump does - rather than their failures.
Hi Josh!
Thanks for this feedback. Some great points for sure.
I may overstate the success of Free Palestine, but they mobilized nearly 1 million in London alone, and it was surely one of the largest global mobilizations in history -- with peak mobilization in key cities (NYC, London) on a scale that has not been seen in recent history. Was much accomplished with that power? I would argue not.
Re: random things said by random people, these were student leaders and orgs at the most important mobilization site of the movement: Columbia. For sure, even movement leaders are diverse, but was there any groundswell to support nonviolence in the face of the CUAD's statements that "violence was the ONLY path forward"? I saw none, and the primary reason was purity tests. I know people kicked out of organizing simply for suggesting an alternative to violent messaging.
XR was successful in some ways, not in others. But compared to Free Palestine, if you asked one year after XR's initial rebellion, had they achieved their goals? In no small part, yes. The UK government had declared a climate emergency, and those with political power who were promoting fossil fuels were on the rocks. XR's problem was sustaining success, not a complete lack of success.
Finally, I'm certainly not assigning blame to anyone, certainly not nonviolent protesters being swept up. But movements do need to think about what we can do strategically to respond most effectively to repression. There is a moment now for the Free Palestine movement to do that. Let's see if they do.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Super thoughtful, and you make very sound points that are worth considering.
Appreciate the thoughtful response and I don't mean that as a throwaway line. I *never* comment online and am only doing so because I have so much respect for you and have learned a lot from you.
On XR vs. Free Palestine. Both have had similar success - at the rhetorical level. XR was able to get the UK government to declare a climate emergency. Free Palestine has been able to get many to declare what is happening a genocide and war crimes. Both have not had success on larger goals - "a just transition" or a ceasefire (let alone a Free Palestine). So I don't think you're really comparing apples-to-apples in declaring one a success and the other a failure.
I think the other thing your piece and comment are missing is that Power (state and corporate interests) learn from the very same social movements that you have. We don't have a draft anymore, for instance, because the access to more (often reluctant or disgruntled) bodies for the war machine isn't worth people opposing US foreign policy.
But even more importantly, Power has learned how to leverage the always on outrage machine and surveillance that J Edgar couldn't have even dreamed of to crush movements. Consider the murder of George Floyd. You and I probably disagree on the revolutionary potential of the police station burning down. But I bet we do agree that what that moment evolved into - corporate DEI trainings, pronouns in email signatures, land acknowledgements - was ridiculously milquetoast. And yet that has still led to a massive backlash with enormous and horrendous consequences.
We live on screens now and that has changed the social movement equations. I'm not confident that Bull Conner would engender the same reaction today. Attacking civil rights activists might just be outrage porn for people on both sides for a few days before they moved onto the next outrage.
Finally, lots of grandparents out there (including my parents!) out there advocating for Palestine. Just not enough people of age between the students and the grandparents. But that is true of every US movement I've ever witnessed so don't think you can blame protest tactics or strategy for that.
I 100% agree. This post seems nearly entirely delusional to reality.
How so?
how much did they pay you to make this garbage article?
$0, sadly! haha
Some of the points you make have some truth in them, but you are missing the fact that AIPAC and CUFI are culturally and politically ingrained. Some of the more derisive comments made by so-called pro Palestinian activists were controlled opposition. Now that trump is president, authoritarianism is the order of the day here in America, while mass genocide is STILL the order in Gaza. It seems you think the movement is over; It is not, but this administration is a danger to all activists. As a 59yr old vegan and pro-human rights, I won't give up on the Palestinians. Or Yemenis. You shouldn't either.
Definitely not giving up on anything! And I agree there are violent plants in every movement. We've seen a lot of them in animal rights! Have you heard of Thomas Jones and the SeaWorld fiasco?
I read your article with interest, and while I appreciate your analysis of social movements, I must strongly disagree with some of your conclusions, particularly regarding the idea of movement convergence and the Free Palestine cause itself.
The Problem with Movement Convergence
The idea of "movement convergence" is often proposed as a strategic advantage, yet in practice, it is always one-sided. Animal rights activists are constantly encouraged to support other social causes—LGBTQ rights, racial justice, feminism, and, as you discuss, Free Palestine. But the reverse never happens. Not once have we seen feminist organizations, LGBTQ activists, or anti-racist movements take a stand for the most oppressed beings on Earth: animals.
This asymmetry is not just unfair; it is a disastrous waste of resources for the animal rights movement. While activists for other causes benefit from solidarity, the animal movement receives nothing in return. And yet, among all causes, it is the most urgent, the most severe in scale, affecting trillions of sentient beings suffering and dying every second in an industry fully legitimized by society. Every moment spent on unrelated causes is a moment lost for those who need it the most.
The Fallacy of the "Free Palestine" Movement
Your article critiques Free Palestine for its strategic mistakes, but the movement’s fundamental flaw is even more profound: it is built on selective outrage. The world is filled with occupied, persecuted, and even genocided populations—Tibetans under China, Kurds spread across hostile nations, Yazidis massacred by ISIS, Ukrainians facing brutal invasion. Yet, Free Palestine activists never mobilize for them. Why? Because their fight is not about universal justice; it is about a narrow political agenda against one specific country: Israel.
Worse, this movement ignores the real culprit behind Gaza’s misery: Hamas. It was not Israel but Hamas that launched an unprovoked massacre on October 7, burning babies alive, raping Jewish women, and butchering civilians in their homes. No one—absolutely no one—in the Free Palestine movement protested against this. This silence reveals everything: their concern is not for human rights, but for demonizing Israel at all costs.
Now, ironically, the people of Gaza themselves are rising up against Hamas, recognizing their true oppressor. Perhaps, at last, the world will begin to see what many have refused to acknowledge.
These are very fair points. Thank you for sharing.
Everyone benefits from animal liberation because it reduces blanket ill treatment of animals, a group that includes humans. But not all humans recognize that humans are animals. Various societal liberation movements hold tenets drawn from "creationistic" sources that pose "mankind" as dominator of other species, or as more excellent than other species and entitled to do with others as they please. So while these other movements benefit from animal liberation, they don't see animal liberation as a source of liberation on multiple fronts, or on their particular fronts. They tend to focus on cruelty towards animals as injustice on a human scale, and on "human rights" to rescue from that cruelty. Because they don't engage on the larger field around the human animal, they tend to get locked into oppositions with other human groups, rather than envisioning and building another kind of world for all animals. This extends obviously to the point where opposition humans are referred to as "animals", a word for "damned", "doomed", "prey", "sacrificial victim", etc. I think the Islamic/Judaic, or Palestinian/Israeli, or Arabic/Israeli, lockup is a classic and premier example of this, but it is certainly not the only one.
Why are you writing about something that has absolutely nothing to do with animals? I have wholeheartedly supported your efforts to free animals from their miserable circumstances because they are my priority. I have my own political views regarding Hamas, the Palestinians, and the protests at Columbia but I do not write about them in my newsletters. My grandson, a Jew, attended Columbia and I am grateful that he graduated before the vile protests began. I am a Christian who believes in the existence of the State of Israel and their absolute right to defend themselves against murderous psychopaths who are dedicated to the death of Jews and the destruction of Israel. "Free Palestine" is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel and I abhor the use of that slogan. Palestinian protestors use threats of death of violence in their rhetoric because Palestinians have been all about violence since Jews were allowed once more to live safely in their ancestral home. They were willing to live peacefully side by side with Muslim Arabs in Israel but the Arabs hated the Jews and wanted them gone. The Arab countries surrounding Israel told Arabs to leave Israel because they were going to attack the new Jewish state and drive the Jews into the sea, after which the Arabs could return to their homes. Unfortunately for the Arabs, the Jews won and have been winning ever since against the extremely violently terrorists who now call themselves Palestinians. Palestinians don't want a successful state to flourish in. They proved that in Gaza. They were given billions of dollars in aid, including from Israel, and spent it all on weapons and building tunnels to attack Israel. If Palestinians had cared about living in peace and prosperity in Gaza that could have happened if they wanted it, but they didn't. Israelis made friends with Gazans, hired them to work for them, provided health care for them, and trusted them. On October 7 we saw how that love and trust was returned by Palestinians who are too filled with hatred of Jews to give a damn about anything but causing misery, death and destruction. If you want to support terrorists who have the capacity to murder two little babies and their mother in cold blood, not to mention all the other innocent people they have murdered, then I do not understand you at all. The very least you can do is not allow your opinions about Palestinians to intrude into your work for the animals and alienate people who have supported you.
Hi Britt! Appreciate these thoughts. The primary reason I'm writing about this is because I think there are lessons to learn for animal advocates. Have you gotten a chance to read the blog? I think there are some social scientific insights that animal advocates can apply but would love your thoughts on whether the lessons I'm drawing actually make sense!
You wrote in the article “I remember having a conversation with Dan Kidby (who was then a director at Animal Rising) about the potential for an alliance between animal rights and Free Palestine”
Dear Racist,
Do you hear yourself when you say “Palestinians have been all about violence”? Aside from the fact that generalizing like that about any group is the definition of xenophobia, Israel was built on the expulsion, mass killings, and ethnic cleansing of indigenous Palestinians to make room for European and other foreign Jews who could not name a single grandparent or ancestor who had so much as stepped foot on Palestine, let alone be native to it. Israeli settlers from the US and other foreign countries continue to illegally occupy more Palestinian lands in the West Bank to this very day. They continue to harass and harm indigenous Palestinians to force them out of their lands, and then land squat and are deluded and ethno-nationalist enough to think that that is their divine right. They are no different than white slave owners and their self-entitlement to the bodies of black slaves in the US. If you want to see what “being all about violence” is like, please take a careful look at the foundations of Israel and its continued violations of international laws and human rights to maintain their artificial country.
Ps this comment is not to Wayne Hsuing but to a commenter on this chain ^
The issue of apocalyptic behaviors calling for killing of anyone at all is entirely relevant to the issue of animal liberation, including human liberation and human societal liberations, as far as I am concerned.
All three "religions", Judaism, Christianity and Islam, persuasively if not invasively, have asserted World-ending and Life-ending futures. All three of them accept the killing of one kind of animal or another as a compensation for their individual human vices. They don't list this killing as a vice, but claim to obey a commandment to not kill. Many children are raised swallowing this anomaly and with this illogical program go on to pose claims against eachother and eventually to take lives over those claims.
The paradoxical character of this behavior in their eyes seems to be elevated to the dignity of a miracle and an ethical motor.
The practicical values that Martin Luther King, Feminists, Abolitionists, and Darwinians established are based partly on the quiet and overshadowed promise of freedom that Christianity offers -- the kindness attributed to Jesus Christ, NOT his Old Testament style threatening and NOT the apocalyptic tantrums of some of his "followers".
Ιτ would be great if members of differing and opposing religious parties would come to terms over the perennial and transcendent topic of Spirit --- Spirit writ large that is, that perpetually and openly describes and embraces the origin of all ideas about it, logically and scientifically, in the sense of Thomas Kuhn's idea of paradigm evolution in the sciences.
To me, the idea of Spirit being "the largest of all Animals" would provide a start.
To my mind, the instruction of children in murder to perpetuate a version of "paternity" is the basic character of the religious triad at issue here.
To me, it appears that America, Israel, Hamas, and Britain, as well as other powers, talk, think and act within the context of that triad of scary religious doctrines that teaches its children to accept killing for the honor of that triad. I think that a way out of that is for individual humans to find an individual beyond themselves and beyond the identity religions assign them, an individual that can be identified with by all. That is what is aimed at, though not entirely reached, in terms such as Spirit, Great Spirit, Holy Spirit, and so on. I don't see any reason why this idea should not be identified also with Earth's Biosphere.
Britt, thank you for articulating my thoughts exactly. I was deeply disappointed to see this in my inbox.
💯
Consistent anti-oppression.
Removed Eric Brooks' comments. No problem with disagreement. Personal insults cross the line. I want to encourage discussion here, but some minimal assumptions of good faith are necessary for reasonable discussion. Appreciate everyone's comments with that spirit in mind!
I was disappointed to see the topic of your recent email, which, in my view, promotes nonsense and inadvertently legitimizes a terrorist organization. The group in question has done nothing for animal rights—or human rights, for that matter. In contrast, Israel has made significant and measurable strides in both areas.
The “Free Palestine” movement continues to fail precisely because it aligns itself with extremist groups responsible for violence and suffering. It’s deeply misguided to equate that cause with legitimate organizations working to minimize real suffering—especially the suffering of animals, who are innocent and undeserving of harm.
Please review your information and facts before sharing this kind of nonsense. A basic understanding of the conflict in the Middle East would show that Palestinians, through the actions of their leadership, have brought much of this situation upon themselves. While no one celebrates suffering, ignoring responsibility and context only furthers misinformation.
Hi Steven, I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, which is part of the reason for the post. It's important to not align yourself to violence if you are a nonviolent movement! That's one area where the Free Palestine movement definitely failed.
My goal here is just to draw lessons from the movement, not necessarily to suggest any alliance. Generally speaking, single issue movements seem to be more effective!
Good morning —
The problem with even engaging in debate about this particular movement is that it gives it a sense of legitimacy it hasn’t earned. This isn’t just a controversial or political issue — it’s a movement actively supporting a terrorist organization. That’s not up for debate.
There are many legitimate causes worthy of discussion. But this isn’t one of them. As someone else pointed out, those who are supporting this movement are mistaken — because they will ultimately lose. Israel is not going anywhere. The tragic result of this conflict so far is that Palestinians have lost Gaza — not because of Israel, but because of Hamas.
If these protests were truly about justice, they would be directed at Hamas or Iran. But they’re not. And we’ve seen how powerful narratives can be manipulated. For example, in the animal rights space, the goal is to expose the cruelty of animal agriculture — because it is evil. That’s the truth. And it’s important to draw that distinction. When someone like Kristi Noem parades around as wholesome while glorifying the abuse of animals, it only shows how evil can wear a very polished mask.
The danger is that evil often hides behind a façade — whether it’s in the form of extremist leaders or animal abusers posing as family-friendly farmers. And too often, the general public is easily swayed by these appearances, whether it's rodeos, bullfights, or Hollywood packaging cruelty as entertainment.
But bringing up these anti-Israel protests under the umbrella of legitimate activism does real harm — not just to innocent Palestinians who suffer the consequences of Hamas’s actions, but to Jewish people who have been integral to this country’s progress. Think of the Jewish professors who helped shape your legal education, or the Jewish doctors who treat everyone equally, without prejudice.
What’s deeply concerning is when people who protest against Israel today step into positions of influence tomorrow — as physicians, attorneys, or leaders. There’s a real fear in the Jewish community that their bias won’t stay at the protest — it could follow into their professional decisions. We’ve seen the answer to that before, and it’s not encouraging.
As an animal rights activist, though, you are amazing. I — along with many other Jews — support DXE wholeheartedly, both financially and emotionally. The animal rights movement is a beautiful, inspiring, and righteous cause. But this issue should not be conflated with it. They are not the same.
Steven, thank you for articulating my thoughts exactly. I was deeply disappointed to see this in my inbox.
I admire your analysis usually greatly and I learn so much - however, think there are many glaring blind spots in this analysis and there is much we can learn actually from this movement. I'm traveling and on deadlines, but when back will attempt to unpack them. The most striking ones is the global Palestine movements is non-violent (altho the media etc misinforms us on this) and the scale of the repression only speaks to the fact the movement is working. The light has been shone on the horrors of the occupation and the genocide. The TikTok attempted ban was about this and the polling of the younger generation speak to this. South African Apartheid didn't end it a day. The movement wasn't over when there were arrests. It took decades, as will this, but one day Palestine will be free, as will, inshallah, all animals.
As Ta Nehisi Coates said in his recent press tour, you are either against apartheid or you're not. You are against occupation or not. You are either against the killing of what is likely hundreds of thousands of innocent civilans, 50% of whom are children, or you dehumanise them and you are not and the pain of others doesn't matter. You either believe they are our children or you do not. You believe 1 life is worth perhaps 100 others (as Albright did when she said the quiet part out loud and that killing 500K Iraqi childen was worth it). BDS is working as it did in S Africa.
It's actually simple. We can finally see the horrors for ourselves and most of the planet stands firmly against this. See the all the countries' votes at the UN. The US may be the main funder of this genocide, but it does not reflect that the movement is a global one.
Those are great tips, Wayne, and I don't think the proPalestine movement has lost yet, and I hope they pay attention to these tips.
Thanks for all you do for the welfare of animals. Being compassionate is so important, and I love being vegan.
I hope so too!
They won’t they are too full of blindness hate
Hi Wayne, I agree with almost everything you wrote here. The only thing I disagree with is how you characterized the Columbia protesters asking for food/water. They had people willing to bring them food, but the school was arresting people for doing so and blocking other students from using their meal plans even when they weren't occupying the building.
I want to contribute to this conversation, and I have the following things to add.
There is a lot of difference between the goals of the Free Palestine (what that means varies a whole lot to different people) and the Animal Rights movement. Animal rights is essentially saying that we should stop killing and abusing animals. Free Palestine could mean: Allow West Bank/Gaza to have their own state, allow Palestinians to have equal rights to Israelis in 1 state, all the way to violently expelling the Israelis (which happened to many Palestinians in 1948). The problem here is, not all activists in this movement want the same thing. This inherently makes it hard to bring people in, as they do not know what they are being brought into.
Now, we could draw a parallel here to how we want to end animal testing, ban factory farming, and eventually stop animal agriculture entirely. But we take this in stages with the end goal in mind and are transparent that we want all of this. Not all Free Palestine activists want to expel Israelis, and the ones that do, say it in concealed ways. That is why "From the River to the Sea" is a loaded statement.
There is also a very long and complicated history to Palestine, and I have participated in conversations with people who discredit my opinion about this if they determine that they know more about it than I do. It is also very difficult for marketing purposes if the goal is not simple and clear. Most people do not want a history lesson, they want to stop seeing children exploded and to see these children live long and happy lives with political freedom.
I think something that you could've touched on more, is that the opposition facing the Palestinians is much more violent than we face as vegans. Maybe you have heard about the documentary "No Other Land" that recently won an Oscar (this film highlights non-violent activism). One of the directors of the film was threatened with rape for making the film, and was recently bloodily beaten and kidnapped. Now, some vegans have really harsh things said to them, but there isn't a camp similar to Sde Teiman where vegan activists are raped for their activism. Things like this anger people a lot.
https://x.com/masafering/status/1904889896914804955
There is also an advantage to the vegan movement, given that it is inherently non-violent. Non-violence is the entire point of veganism. I say this to say that it isn't as if vegans are smarter and respect social science, we are fighting a different fight. Many of the organizers would not describe themselves as peace activists.
In any event may we be compassionate to all those who are suffering.
Thanks, Wayne. As always, you have offered us plenty to think about. I believe that our empathy for animals must be linked to our empathy for human beings being maimed and killed in war.
Excellent, Wayne. Thank you.
How should nonviolent movments respond to the violence of the Police and larger agencies?
Frankly even if the protests were largely nonviolent they'd still be attacked and people arrested.
Is allowing police or zionists into your movement not a risk of having your movement undercut or even destroyed? Do you think Israeli apartheid and occupation will just be given up peacefully?
And just as a note the struggle against apartheid in south africa feature armed struggle so to did ending british occupation in most of Ireland. Would you describe those as unsuccessful? what about the revolutions in Cuba or Vientnam?
And in reality, the pro-Palestinian protests HAVE been non-violent for the most part until outside agitators or law enforcement come in and stir chaos and cause violence. I don’t know why we’re going after a movement that is simply against war crimes and apartheid, when the movement is being actively targeted by several powerful parties (exhibit a essentially the entire federal government). The argument here asking the pro-Palestinian movement be nonviolent feels kind of ridiculous when the protests have been largely non-violent. The only violence I can think of is potentially the violence against buildings owned by weapons companies, which, well, what are we doing here. I’m seeing other comments entirely brainwashed by state propaganda implying that Palestinians deserve what is happening to them, and really? Again, what are we doing here? A teen born under active occupation deserves to be bombed to death? An infant deserves to be maimed? I think there are valid points to make against the current state of the pro-Palestinian movement but I’m not finding much here. And to the point that animal rights activists shouldn’t support this movement or others because it’s a 2-way street, this stuff isn’t transactional. Human lives, just like wildlife live, aren’t to be supported and advocated for only if they benefit us or our beliefs. And objectively, people won’t focus on animal rights and environmentalism until their basic needs are met, unfortunately. Until we live in an equitable society everywhere around the globe, people fighting for animal rights must support positions on human rights for all, whether it’s for Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank or in America being disappeared by DHS/ICE, LGBTQ folks and activists, climate change and animal rights advocates, BLM or Native American rights actions, anti-war movements in Sudan, Congo, Ukraine. This is the time to be united on all fronts. I don’t know if that makes sense or if this sounds too aggressive, I just can’t read something like this right after seeing university students my age indefinitely detained or devastated 5 year old children who have just lost their entirely family or homes and have nothing left. Who have only experienced war and injustice. I think we can do better here.
An important point to be made is that non-violent movements that face violence from the police or other groups will face more violence if they use violence themselves. It doesn't make people safer to use violence, quite the opposite actually. If you are concerned about activist safety, non violence is the best way.
Now there is another conversation about effectiveness and if non-violent resistance better than violent resistance. I think it depends on the context and exact circumstances. Within the US in 2025, I strongly believe that non-violent resistance is more effective
These ice detention camps are run by blackrock 🧃🥤🧃🥤
I'm surprised by this, Wayne. There are plenty of problems with the pro-Palestine movement, and like any movement there are plenty of idiots and grandstanders in it. But to attribute the movement's "failure" entirely to not conforming to your model of activism seems arrogant and narrow-minded.
Much of your evidence is based in a couple of dumb viral moments. The Finkelstein confrontation was stupid but hardly indicative of the movement as a whole, which has platformed Norm again and again. The "Zionists don't deserve to live" was likewise offensive and stupid, but to claim that that's characteristic of the movement seems like willing participation in the political campaign to discredit it. AR activists say dumb shit sometimes, too. Would you agree with me if I wrote a post cherry picking the dumbest thing some self-glorifying AR radical has ever said and suggested it means the AR movement embraces violence? Would you find it fair for me to say that the FBI's repression of non-violent activism by DxE is actually the AR movement's fault because some dipshit once called for violence in defense of animals?
You also entirely ignore the violent rhetoric coming from the other side. Are you going to write a post on the pro-Israel movement, and the people within it who have called for turning Gaza into a parking lot and suggested that there are no innocents among them? How will you reconcile that criticism with the obvious success of the pro-Israel movement on almost every level? You can't have it both ways.
It seems like an odd time to criticize protesters for masking. In an ideal world, I agree that the masks look menacing and cowardly and it's much better optics to show your face. But the Trump administration is now snatching up protesters off the street for writing op-eds. Obviously there's a real security purpose for concealing your identity, it isn't just larping and "safetyism."
And then I find it the height of irony to criticize the "purity politics" of the pro-Palestinian movement by quoting a leader from ... Extinction Rebellion? I don't know how or why you consider XR to be "unusually successful," but most of what I hear about their actions blocking freeways and subway trains etc. is how much they infuriate the everyday people they need to win over and turn them against the climate movement. Seriously inconveniencing and disrupting the daily lives of regular working people to scold them into paying attention to your issue seems like the very definition of patronizing "purity politics" to me.
Lastly, have you been to a pro-Palestinian protest? Not sure how you think they're alienating Jews, when half the people who attend them are Jewish, they do shabbat services, etc. Obviously pro-Israel Jews are alienated, but that's like saying the AR movement is doing a terrible job being inclusive of McDonald's executives.
The most remarkable thing though about your analysis is how you're completely ignoring the overwhelming campaign of government repression this movement has faced, which has now culminated in revoking visas at the arbitrary discretion of Marco Rubio and putting an academic department into receivership. Do you think it's at all possible that the pro-Palestinian movement has not been successful in restraining Israel because it's been utterly demonized to the point where regular Americans literally think that college kids are Hamas-loving genocidal terrorists, and has been the target of a whole-of-government crusade to annihilate it, the single-minded obsession of which we haven't seen in this country since McCarthyism?
100%
Some of us have been to the West Bank as volunteer de-escalators and have not cowered yet find themselves helpless against the U.S. aided war machine
Wow it only takes a few sentences to realize that this is ignorant, tendentious bullshit