The Un-Jews Elect a Mayor

How Jewish anti-Zionists made hostility to Israel a moral credential

Zohran Mamdani—a Democratic Socialist defined as much by his contempt for Zionism as by his politics—is on the verge of becoming mayor of New York City. In a city where Democrats make up 66 percent of the electorate, his rise might appear inevitable. But his path to the top of the polls was paved by a more jarring fact: his margin of support was delivered by Jewish voters, 20 percent of whom now back a candidate openly hostile to the very existence of the Jewish state.

This should not come as a surprise.

It is the culmination of a steady ideological realignment in the Democratic Party, where opposition to Israel has become not just acceptable, but foundational—the great unifying cause of its activist base. And this shift has not been imposed from the outside. It has been fueled, led, and intellectually sanctified by Jews on the extreme Left.

In every generation, we are warned: threats to the Jewish people come not only from our enemies, but from our own. Today, as Israel faces an existential campaign of defamation from the global Left, that internal threat is embodied not by the unaffiliated or apathetic but by the anti-Zionist Jews who weaponize their identity to undermine Jewish self-determination.

In their seminal 2021 essay, Natan Sharansky and Gil Troy gave these individuals a name: the Un-Jews. Not content to walk away from Jewish peoplehood, they define themselves in opposition to it. Their sense of moral authority comes not from affirming Jewish history, memory, or continuity, but from repudiating them in the name of a distorted universalism.

What began as a cultural critique has metastasized into a strategic cancer. The Un-Jews have not merely abandoned Israel—they have become its most effective internal saboteurs, offering the intellectual scaffolding and political license for its delegitimization. All while Israeli civilians are murdered, synagogues are firebombed, and chants of genocide echo on American campuses.

Koshering the Calumny

The slogans of Hamas—“From the River to the Sea” and “Globalize the Intifada”—are not only tolerated but sanctified by progressive Jewish voices. They are rationalized as legitimate expressions of Palestinian freedom, even as their historical and linguistic meanings are clear calls for the destruction of Israel and the normalization of violence. But with Jewish signatories affixing their names to petitions, op-eds, and social media campaigns, these phrases gain a kosher stamp of moral authority.

No longer fringe, these positions have become mainstream. “River to the sea” has been repackaged as liberation rhetoric. “Intifada” is reframed as resistance. And those who challenge them are accused not of defending Jews, but of silencing Palestinian voices or upholding white supremacy.

This is the great laundering project of the Un-Jews: to strip antisemitism of its sting by redefining it as moral clarity, provided it is directed against Zionists.

The Collapse of Red Lines

When Zohan Mamdani, a DSA-endorsed New York City Council member who calls Zionism “a death project,” announced his campaign for mayor, it was not condemned but welcomed by progressives, including Jews. Mamdani has publicly defended the chant “From the River to the Sea” and described the October 7 massacre as the result of “the violence of Israeli occupation,” not the choice of genocidal actors. And yet Congressman Jerry Nadler—long seen as a stalwart of pro-Israel liberalism—endorsed him without hesitation.

Even Senator Chuck Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in US history, who months ago delivered a rare floor speech criticizing Benjamin Netanyahu and calling for new elections in Israel, has remained silent as that criticism is translated into active political support for those who deny Israel’s right to exist altogether. The issue is no longer Netanyahu. It is Zionism itself.

And here is the most chilling shift: what was once coded and indirect anti-Zionism is now overt. Endorsing slogans that call for the destruction of the Jewish state does not disqualify a candidate from progressive Jewish support. On the contrary, it is increasingly seen as a mark of moral leadership.

The Data Behind the Realignment

This ideological rupture is not merely anecdotal—it is now quantifiable. Zach Goldberg (full disclosure, my smarter son), whose work has tracked the transformation of progressive discourse from universalist idealism to an often illiberal, anti-Zionist orthodoxy, came out with an essential article in Tablet entitled How the Media Manufactured a ‘Genocide’

The chart below shows that coverage linking Israel with genocide has surged far beyond every other agreed-upon historical case of genocide across all examined outlets. In The New York Times and other major media outlets, articles pairing Israel and genocide reached levels more than nine times higher than the peak for Rwanda and nearly six times greater than for Darfur.

As Zach notes, “This is not a minor anomaly. It marks a profound shift in how the concept of genocide is being applied in public discourse.” The anti-Jewish narrative shift influences public opinion and leads to the application of double standards in how Jews are perceived and treated. Zach also found that nearly 23% of Americans think Israel is a greater threat to the US than Iran, Russia, and China.

Probing further, he discovered that the most anti-Israel groups are extreme left or low-IQ/high on generalized conspiratorial ideation' middle (The QAnon kooks, Tucker Carlson zombies and other humanity-hating right-wing extremists.) Yet, the graph below shows that liberals are, after the core anti-Israel group, more likely to regard Israel as a threat than any conservatives.

“Media coverage does not dictate public opinion, but it helps set the tone and frame the moral stakes.” The narrative-driven shift in attitudes also affects how Jews are treated. A survey by Karen Cypher of the Decyphered Substack (who, along with Zach and me, will launch a platform to track how narrative changes and the normalization of terms like genocide, apartheid, and supremacy influence public policy and the treatment of Jews) presented respondents with two identical scenarios.¹

In one case, a Jewish student blocks a Palestinian student from entering a building and yells, "Go back to where you came from." In another, a Palestinian student does the exact same thing to a Jewish student victim. The survey shows 66 percent of Democrats support serious disciplinary consequences when the aggressor is Jewish, but only 45% do so when the aggressor is Palestinian. Among Americans under age 45, the difference is even greater: 78% versus 46%.

Another survey conducted by Karen just last week shows that 61% of Florida voters blame Iran for escalating the current Middle East conflict. But among Democrats, 79% blame Israel, and among voters under 45, 63% say Israel is more responsible.

The Short-Term Political Reality

This is the climate in which Zorhan Mamdani thrives—not despite his views, but because of them. Anti-Zionism is no longer disqualifying on the Left—it is energizing in large part because anti-Zionist Jews have made such sentiments acceptable.

Republicans are positioned to benefit politically, at least in the short term. Mamdani’s rise and the normalization of anti-Zionist extremism will likely alienate swing voters, moderate Jews, and non-Jewish centrists in key suburban districts where Israel still commands bipartisan sympathy. Expect Republicans to make Mamdani a household name—a stand-in for a Democratic Party that appears, to many, to have abandoned its moral center on Israel.

In New York, Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, Mamdani-style rhetoric will be used to peel off Jewish Democrats, mobilize concerned independents, and reinforce GOP dominance in swing districts where Zionism still maps to decency.

And yet, even as the right exploits the Left’s collapse, it is not immune to its own descent. Tucker Carlson and a growing faction of nationalist conservatives have embraced their own brand of antisemitic rhetoric—cloaked in anti-globalist narratives and white identitarianism. Many of these voices flourished in the Trump era and remain embedded in the conservative movement. But while the right flirts with antisemitism, the left institutionalizes it. Carlson is a media personality; Mamdani may be the next mayor of America’s largest city.

Conclusion: The Danger Within

The Un-Jews are not abandoning Zionism reluctantly; they are abandoning it ritually, publicly, and with conviction. Like the Wicked Son in the Haggadah, his goal is to sow doubt about the future and value of a Jewish state, starting with the unquestioning and unknowing sons that make up a growing portion of the Jewish diaspora.

Thus, modern Jewish anti-Zionism—especially when voiced within Jewish circles— recycles the same fundamental rejection: the denial of the Jewish people's unique role tied to land, sovereignty, and covenant. The Midrash teaches that what we now call anti-Zionist Judaism is simply the latest manifestation of a spiritual and historical struggle that began with Amalek.

The Un-Jews are Amalek’s descendants. They do not merely seek to erase Jewish peoplehood—they lend credibility to those who would finish the job. It is Un-Jews who enable the Mamdanis of American politics to march under the banner of justice, handing antisemites the rhetoric, the legitimacy, and the Jewish voices they need to deny that they are antisemitic at all.

The answer to this betrayal is not retreat, apology, or fear. The answer is a courageous, unapologetic, and muscular Zionism—one that reclaims Jewish identity not as a guilt-ridden accessory to progressive causes, but as the proud assertion of a sovereign people determined to survive, to speak, and to lead.

1. The initiative is called Seker, which is Hebrew for survey. We will gather empirical data on the origins and spread of antisemitic ideas across ideological, academic, and political networks. Unlike traditional surveys, it aims to map the ecosystems supporting hostility toward Israel and the Jewish community, focusing on how anti-Zionist narratives—sometimes promoted by Jews—shape public opinion, elite discourse, and policy. By combining qualitative analysis with network data, Seker will uncover not only the existence of antisemitism but also the mechanisms that make it seem credible.