With BLM fading, the left turns to an even less popular cause -- the destruction of Israel

The BLM movement was all the rage (and not just literally) in 2020. In the years since, it has fizzled and some of its mischief and insanity has been rolled back.

The anti-Israel, Palestinian-from-the-river-to-the-sea movement has become the left’s entry in the rage sweepstakes this year. It’s an unpromising entry though, demanding, as it does, the eradication of Israel and of the Jews who will, of course, fight to defend their homeland. But, as they say, any port in a storm.

The BLM movement failed because its agenda was unpopular and, in many cases, irrational. This, despite several important factors working in its favor.

The movement had an impressive coalition of supporters — blacks, hardcore leftists, and liberals. It could claim to be the descendant of a movement most Americans, including conservatives, respect — the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

It had a somewhat sympathetic symbol in George Floyd whose last moments, captured on camera, cried out for compassion. And, of course, he was a fellow American.

The anti-Israel coalition is less impressive. It consists of Arab-American and Muslims, a much smaller group than blacks. It includes, of course, hardcore leftists, but its support among liberals is considerably less robust than was BLM’s in its heyday.

For example, I don’t expect to see hundreds of my fellow Bethesda, Maryland residents kneeling at a rally in support of the Palestine-from-the-river-to-the-sea, like they knelt for BLM four years ago. In fact, there won’t be any such a rally. If anything, some of these folks will attend rallies supporting Israel. (And by the way, some of the 2020 kneelers are now on neighborhood listservs complaining about the increase in crime.)

The anti-Israel movement is bound to divide liberal opinion, and not just because most Jews are liberals. As Peter Berkowitz observes:

The left advocates social justice; celebrates diversity, equity, and inclusion; and professes special concern for historically oppressed minorities. Meanwhile, Gaza’s Iran-backed jihadists torture and kill based on race, ethnicity, and sexual preference; loathe and wage war against Israelis, Jews, Americans, and the West; and, by all available means, seek to establish Islamist theocracy.

The anti-Israel movement relies on sympathy for the population of Gaza (never mind that this population supports, and indeed breeds, terrorists). But there is no George Floyd to stand as their symbol. And Gazans are not Americans.

Nor can Hamas, the real face of Gaza, be airbrushed away. In fact, the “river-to-the-sea” movement doesn’t pretend it can, or should, be.

You can’t contemplate eliminating the Jewish state without a force like Hamas. The leaders of the movement understand this and some of their rhetoric, such as “We are Hamas” and “Glory to all our martyrs,” reflects that understanding.

And what great American movement can the Israel haters claim to be the heirs of? Certainly not the civil rights movement of Martin Luther King. Sometimes we hear references to the anti-apartheid in South Africa movement. That’s quite a stretch inasmuch as that movement never sought to eradicate a state or to kill its inhabitants. In any case, the anti-apartheid movement has little resonance with most Americans.

Finally, there’s this reality. Police officers will continue to interact with black criminals and some of these interactions will go badly, providing fuel for BLM. By contrast, the war in Gaza will end, probably this year. At that point, the Israel haters will lose most of their fuel.

For these reasons, I don’t see the anti-Israel movement living up to the left’s hopes for it. I expect it to flounder, as BLM has, but more rapidly. BLM floundered mainly because its agenda was unpopular and, in some cases, irrational. The anti-Israel agenda is unpopular and fundamentally evil.

This is not to deny that the movement will have some successes. It already has.

The movement has helped pressure Joe Biden into pressuring Israel to be less aggressive than it should be in its war against Hamas. In the not-too-distant-future, Israel may no longer be able to rely on Democrats for support. But if the Dems lean strongly in the anti-Israel direction, it will be to their detriment.

In any case, there will be no Palestine from the river to the sea.

However, even as the movement flounders, it will it go away. As Abe Greenwald shows, the Israel haters are generously funded by multiple sources. These include usual suspects like American Muslims for Palestine and the U.S. Coalition to Boycott Israel. They also include Tides Foundation, which is supported by George Soros, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Susan and Nick Pritzker.

And let’s not forget foreign nations, most notably Qatar, that give large amounts of money to certain colleges and universities. You might think there’s so much rot at these institutions that Qatar need not try to drive them towards hatred of Israel. But according to Greenwald:

There is a statistically robust link between the money and the Jew-hatred. ISGAP’s study found that, between 2015 and 2020, schools that accepted money from Qatar (and other Middle Eastern donors) averaged 300 percent more anti-Semitic incidents than those that did not. And Qatar-funded campuses were also more resistant to traditional democratic norms such as free speech. Qatar’s investment allows it to influence universities by organizing conferences and joint-research projects where Qatari administrators and researchers can indirectly relay Doha’s agenda to their Western counterparts.

But BLM was lavishly supported, including by some of the same sources. And it had even more media backing than the Israel-haters have.

Yet, it has become unpopular and lost much of its influence. That’s how things usually turn out in a democracy.

The river-to-the-sea movement likely faces the same fate. Indeed, it seems already to be facing it. As Greenwald writes:

[A] backlash against the pro-Hamas encampments has come more swiftly than the one that followed the defund-the-police campaign. In the 21st century, there is a predictable arc to a radical movement’s progress. First, a significant segment of the public embraces it. Next, the liberal establishment responds by incorporating its ideas in policy. Then, the policy produces tragic results. And, eventually, the public turns on the movement. Such was the case with police-defunding.

But polls indicate that the public is already opposed to the pro-Hamas encampments, just by virtue of their existence. Meanwhile, the fraternity brothers who hoisted an American flag at the center of a pro-Hamas rally at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have received more than half a million dollars from appreciative patriots.

And, really, how could it be otherwise? In joining forces, the woke and the Islamists may have compounded their resources, but they’ve also compounded the disgust that the public already harbored for each group individually. The spectacle of their blended pathologies will be, and already is, their discrediting and their undoing. Not ours.