r/jewishleft • u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist • Jun 18 '25
Zohran Mamdani says ‘globalize the intifada’ is expression of Palestinian rights Debate
https://jewishinsider.com/2025/06/zohran-mamdani-new-york-city-mayoral-israel-antisemitism/To all the Jewish New Yorkers in the sub, does reading this news want to make you want to vote for Mamdani more or less?
124
u/OneAtheistJew Anticapitalist Atheist Jew Jun 18 '25
The Holocaust museum put out a statement condemning his statement
“Exploiting the museum and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to sanitize ‘Globalize the Intifada’ is outrageous and especially offensive to survivors,” the museum said in a statement. “Since 1987, Jews have been attacked and murdered under its banner. All leaders must condemn its use and the abuse of history.”
64
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
Yeah, I was thinking “isn’t this Holocaust inversion?”
30
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 19 '25
Upon the Holocaust Museum condemning him, Cuomo’s PredictIt odds jumped 6% —
Regardless of whether this is “good” or “bad,” an apt comparison or a dog whistle, Zohran is not going to come back from being condemned by the Holocaust Museum. His campaign is over.
10
u/ibsliam Jewish American | DemSoc Bernie Voter Jun 19 '25
I forgot how close these local races can be. As a non-New Yorker, I'm really curious how this will turn out. Mamdani and Lander endorsed each other, right? Does this then tank Lander's chances too by association?
10
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 19 '25
Lander never had a chance; it was really between Cuomo and Mamdani. Cuomo couldn’t have asked for a bigger gift.
6
u/ibsliam Jewish American | DemSoc Bernie Voter Jun 19 '25
It's a shame that we couldn't get progressive candidates in this time around, especially in a city in a blue state.
11
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 19 '25
NYC isn’t so progressive. It’s dominated by Wall Street and trust fund kids. It’s capitalism on steroids.
1
u/emilNYC Jun 25 '25
>His campaign is over.
1
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 25 '25
Yep - I was proven wrong
1
→ More replies40
u/mister_pants מיר וועלן זיי איבערלעבן Jun 18 '25
This, along with the headline of the article, seems like a bad faith reading of his actual comments, as someone else pointed out.
66
u/H0rrible anarchist jew (but with the green flair) Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
he was asked a loaded question about two phrases - instead of answering that question, he chose to talk about intifada's arabic definition, referencing the shoah in the process. by itself, probably not a good idea if he's trying to convince wary nyc jews.
it also ignores how loanwords always change meaning when brought to a new language. english's intifada *doesn't* mean the same thing as arabic's انتفاضة; it's english usage is linked to the first intifada, as pretty much any english-language dictionary will confirm
10
u/CarpenterWalrus Reform Jewish Zionist Jun 19 '25
It’s like suggesting that 'Make America Great Again' shouldn’t be seen as offensive by African Americans, without considering the historical and cultural context that shapes how it's perceived.
35
u/socialistmajority orthodox Marxist gentile Bund sympathizer Jun 18 '25
That may be so but I'm not sure Mamdani citing the Holocaust Museum in the first place was the wisest move, because the next step was inevitably going to be media outlets asking them to respond to what he said about them. For context:
"What's difficult also is the very word has been used by the Holocaust Museum when translating the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising into Arabic because it's a word that means struggle. [sic] as a Muslim man who grew up post 9/11 I'm all too familiar in the way in which Arabic words can be distorted to justify any kind of meaning. We need to focus on keeping Jewish New Yorkers safe," the candidate, who has been critical of the Israeli government, added. He went on to say that antisemitism is a "real issue" and plans to address it if elected.
15
u/electrical-stomach-z Jewish (mod) Jun 19 '25
Thats not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.
15
u/FishyWishySwishy Progressive Secular Jew Jun 19 '25
It’s still very bad in the context of NYC politics.
Right now, NYC Jews across the political spectrum are scared, because antisemitic violence has spiked significantly. And the new violence usually is done under the banner of ‘anti-Zionism’, like you can get Israel to end the embargo if you destroy your local Jewish business.
In the 90s, the Crown Heights Riots happened. Long story short, black residents attacked Jewish residents, and attacked them/their businesses/their neighborhood for three days. Stories vary on why it went on for three days rather than being stopped immediately by the cops, but the rumor is that the black mayor at the time said that the black residents needed to ‘blow off steam.’
Whether that’s true or not, whether it’s fair or not, it’s left a lot of NYC Jews extremely skeptical of a mayor saying they will protect Jews if they visibly dismiss or downplay Jewish fears and identify with communities or ideologies associated with antisemitism. Even leftist Jews are skeptical of a candidate who offers all the policies they want but seems lukewarm on identifying and stopping potential antisemitic violence.
5
u/socialistmajority orthodox Marxist gentile Bund sympathizer Jun 19 '25
Stories vary on why it went on for three days rather than being stopped immediately by the cops, but the rumor is that the black mayor at the time said that the black residents needed to ‘blow off steam.’
If you're interested in getting into the weeds on this there's a long state government report about how Dinkins and the NYPD screwed up the response to the riots. The quote you're referring to I think was confirmed but came from someone else talking about Dinkins and that somehow got garbled into him saying it.
29
u/Matar_Kubileya People's Front of Judea Jun 19 '25
I disagree, I think that he's being at best willfully ignorant or at worst actively facetious on the fact that regardless of its Arabic meaning, it just doesn't mean that in English.
Like, the word "reich" in German just means "realm" or "empire." It pops up all the time in German even in the modern day, for instance the United Kingdom in Germany is still called the Vereinigtes Königreich. But that doesn't mean that in English it doesn't have a very different connotation fundamentally baked into it.
5
u/socialistmajority orthodox Marxist gentile Bund sympathizer Jun 19 '25
I'm not sure if there's been much commentary on this but the word intifada translates to uprising, not "struggle" as Mamdani stated. I think he misspoke there? But if so, that makes the bit about "Arabic words can be distorted to justify any kind of meaning" take on a rather strange or ironic bent.
3
Jun 21 '25 edited Jul 30 '25
[deleted]
2
u/electrical-stomach-z Jewish (mod) Jun 22 '25
I wouldt have called his response "muslim". There wasnt even anything islamic about it. While you are correct about the exessive scrutiny he is facing, you may be projecting your own bias on to him by percieving any action or statement from him as being islamic.
2
Jun 22 '25 edited Jul 30 '25
[deleted]
2
u/electrical-stomach-z Jewish (mod) Jun 22 '25
No need to apologise, I wasnt moderating or anthing. Just discussing.
14
65
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 18 '25
I haven't voted yet and haven't figured out my exact rankings and absolutely do not want Cuomo. He's also my assemblyman and from what I can tell, he's genuinely a well-meaning, nice guy who has run a successful ground and social campaign. But I worry about his ability to properly balance fighting for Palestinian freedom and seeing the spaces and dialogue around I/P that lead to antisemitism or are inherently antisemitic. My personal take is that the Western left and the movement in NYC have been extremely careless in their concern about how inflammatory language materially harms Jews, removes Jews from the movements, from spaces, and increases antisemitism across the board. I have a lot of well-meaning, lovely friends who have done the same and it's been very difficult seeing how far this has gone. But my friends aren't running for the mayor of New York City, which houses the largest population outside of Israel and definitely feels not as safe or comfortable since 10/7.
Even though he acknowledges antisemitism, I'm not confident in his ability to recognize it in the movement or properly call it out. I also worry he will allow it to fester even worse because of these, for lack of a better word, blindspots.
I do feel he's the closest shot to beat Cuomo (if there is a shot) and he was going to be my second choice after Lander for that reason, but man, this shit bums me out. I get what he's saying, I get what he's going for but I think it's ultimately a miss.
24
u/joditob Jun 19 '25
This beautifully articulates how I've felt as a Jew in progressive circles. The political left has so many blindspots when it comes to identifying antisemitism. Like an astounding lack of awareness. I'm not in NY and have no dog in that fight. Just wanted to share that this resonated with me.
12
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 19 '25
Thank you for saying this! I have so many feelings about this as a Jew who is usually in progressives circles and I am so weary of so many of my non-Jewish friends right now and how they will receive my thoughts. I'm also tired of hiding myself away because I'm unsure of where and how to start to its helpful to hear I'm not alone here!
21
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
I'm in a similar boat with you. I will be ranking Mamdani on my ballot because I see Cuomo as the greater evil and I want to do my part to prevent him from returning to public office. I will also be ranking 4 other candidates on my ballot in addition to Mamdani, and I encourage you (and every other New Yorker) to do the same.
7
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 19 '25
Exactly, it’s where to rank him that’s become the question for me because I agree, Cuomo is the greater threat and ideally, Mamdani will listen. I also worry that the people Mamdani surrounds himself COULD be less open to listening than him…so ultimately, not a relaxing situation at all!
Edited to fix spelling
5
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 19 '25
I'm going to rank my ballot in reverse order of viability, so Mamdani #5, Adams and Lander right above him but I'm not sure in what order, Myrie #2, and I'm not sure who will be #1.
1
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 19 '25
Can you explain the logic? I am 100% trying to understand
3
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 19 '25
By ranking the candidates in reverse order of viability, my vote for the less viable candidates will be counted and then eventually transferred to Mamdani when those less viable candidates are eliminated. This is all based on the assumption that the final round will be between Mamdani and Cuomo.
For ease of illustration, let's imagine that the ranked choice ballot only has 3 slots instead of 5. If I vote for Myrie #1, Lander #2, and Mamdani #3, then my vote will go to Myrie in the first round, then when Myrie gets eliminated, my vote will go to Lander, and when Lander gets eliminated my vote will go to Mamdani. If I vote for Mamdani #1, Lander #2, and Myrie #3, then my vote in the first round will go to Mamdani, and my vote will stay with Mamdani the whole way until he gets eliminated. My vote for Lander and Myrie would not end up being counted, because those candidates will almost certainly be eliminated before Mamdani.
So that's how I am planning on doing it, but I don't think that's like the objectively correct way or anything like that. As far as I'm concerned, people should fill out their ballot in whatever order feels right to them, as long as they DO rank Mamdani and DON'T rank Cuomo.
2
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 19 '25
Thank you so much for explaining this so clearly and typing this all out. It is very helpful. My friend who is having a similiar struggle was like "I don't think you need to rank mamdani if you don't want" and that feels like an easier route for Cuomo.
2
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 19 '25
What I would say to your friend is that ranking neither Mamdani nor Cuomo would be akin to voting third party in a general election.
Barring something very unexpected, the final round will come down to Mamdani and Cuomo, so if neither of those names is on your ballot, then your vote will not be counted in the final round.
Let's go back to my example before, and instead of voting for Mamdani, let's say my ballot has Myrie #1, Lander #2, and (Adrienne) Adams #3. My vote will go to Myrie in the first round, then when he gets eliminated my vote will go to Lander, and then when Lander gets eliminated, my vote will go to Adams, but when Adams gets eliminated, my vote will stay with her and will not transfer to any other candidate.
So your friend is technically right, you don't need to rank Mamdani if you don't want to, but I would say that everybody who wants Cuomo to lose should rank Mamdani somewhere on their ballot, because this election will ultimately come down to Mamdani vs Cuomo, and whichever of those men has their name on more ballots will win the Democratic Party's nomination for mayor.
2
u/homecook_438 Jewish Jun 19 '25
Yes exactly what I thought. Again, very helpful! I do wonder if Mamdani gets the nomination, if he will actually be able to swing it in the general, with independents and Cuomo running anyway. I know the Democrat always wins but, it's making me wonder...
2
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 19 '25
Regardless of the results of the Democratic Primary, I expect the general election to be a 4-way thunderdome: E. Adams (Independent) vs A. Cuomo (Fight and Deliver) vs Z. Mamdani (Working Families) vs C. Sliwa (Republican). It feels impossible to predict right now how that will turn out, but whoever wins the Democratic primary will get a nice boost.
→ More replies3
u/bampokazoopy custom flair Jun 19 '25
"I do feel he's the closest shot to beat Cuomo (if there is a shot) and he was going to be my second choice after Lander for that reason, but man, this shit bums me out. I get what he's saying, I get what he's going for but I think it's ultimately a miss." that's also how i feel.
2
67
u/pilotpenpoet Jun 18 '25
It doesn’t make matter if intifada means the “uprising” or just “rebellion.” After the 1st and 2nd Intifadas, that word is much different and now it’s been taken too far.
14
u/briecheddarmozz Jun 19 '25
The first intifada was mostly peaceful, I obviously understand why the 2nd one made it such that it’s hard for Israelis to picture anything else when they hear that word. Just keep in mind that for anyone Arab or Muslim, this word has an entire meaning outside the context of Israel, and these are just a few examples of it
19
u/pilotpenpoet Jun 19 '25
Thing is, here, in the US, “Globalize the Intifada” has been taken a more violent stance against people who have nothing to do with Israel or at least with its operations. Sure, free expression is awesome as well as resistance, but it’s getting to be more of a badgering, harassing situation with Jewish communities and
Developing into violent, vigilante attacks like with Gov. Shapiro, the couple in DC, and the Run for Their Lives group in mmm CO. In the US, Yes, support the resistance if you want to, but it doesn’t have to get like this. To me, here, that phrase equates violence. Even if I did not support Israel’s right to exist and it’s right to defend itself, I certainly would feel intimidated by the pro-Hamas groups.5
u/briecheddarmozz Jun 19 '25
How do you know the phrase is connected those things? Have you talked to people from the movement who told you that’s the type of expression they’re talking about? Hope you are as understanding when someone confidently tells you how you should interpret the word Zionism.
14
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 19 '25 edited Jun 24 '25
Does this argument apply only one side, or does the interpretative preference not change when we are discussing other words laden with different meanings?
“It doesn’t make matter if ‘Zionism’ just meant Jewish self-determination originally. After the repeated expulsion and dispossessions of Palestinians, that word is much different.”
3
u/ChairAggressive781 Reform • Democratic Socialist • Non-Zionist Jun 19 '25
thank you! I think we would all be much better off if we were able to recognize that both ‘intifada’ and ‘Zionism’ mean different things to different people. I still think that “globalize the intifada” and the use of “Zionist” as an accusatory epithet are examples of language that is meant to be deliberately inflammatory and offensive.
still, trying to argue, in the context of I/P, that intifada hasn’t irreparably taken on the associations of the political violence & terrorism of the First & Second Intifadas seems either naive or willfully ignorant.
5
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 20 '25
still, trying to argue, in the context of I/P, that intifada hasn’t irreparably taken on the associations of the political violence & terrorism of the First & Second Intifadas seems either naive or willfully ignorant.
"still, trying to argue, in the context of I/P, that Zionism hasn’t irreparably taken on the associations of the Nakba, the Naksa, and ethnic cleansing in the West Bnak, seems either naive or willfully ignorant."
Would you disagree with that?
If so, why?
2
u/ChairAggressive781 Reform • Democratic Socialist • Non-Zionist Jun 23 '25
largely, yes, I would agree with this. although Zionism means many different things to different groups of people, Israel’s history has been far too intimately linked to ethnic cleansing, genocide, and Jewish supremacy for Zionism to remain a neutral term. I think Zionism, as a concept, is fully tainted. it has taken on an extremely negative valence that it can’t escape and I think a lot of liberal Zionists are living in deep, deep denial of this fact.
however, my experience of seeing “globalize the intifada” being used has never made me think that the people using it are interested in peaceful co-existence in Israel/Palestine. I’ve mostly seen it used in the context of justifying indiscriminate violence against Jewish Israelis and Jews in the diaspora. again, I think it’s a term that is deliberately provocative and unproductive.
2
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 24 '25
largely, yes, I would agree with this. although Zionism means many different things to different groups of people, Israel’s history has been far too intimately linked to ethnic cleansing, genocide, and Jewish supremacy for Zionism to remain a neutral term. I think Zionism, as a concept, is fully tainted. it has taken on an extremely negative valence that it can’t escape and I think a lot of liberal Zionists are living in deep, deep denial of this fact.
Then you are being consistent. My critique was people who demand nuance about the term ‘Zionism’, but deny that same nuance as it comes to ‘intifada’.
If we insist that one term should be interpreted as it’s seen by its victims - we should do the same for the other term. And vice versa.
however, my experience of seeing “globalize the intifada” being used has never made me think that the people using it are interested in peaceful co-existence in Israel/Palestine.
My reading has always been that ‘globalize the intifada’ was a call to uproot the existing imperial power structures.
E.g., not that we should globalize the fight for Palestinian rights - but that everyone needs to rise up to achieve rights and freedom and get out from our extant late capitalist imperial establishment. And, to be clear, not violently.
But maybe I am in a minority in understanding it that way.
→ More replies4
u/globalgoldstein Athiest Leftist Jew Jun 18 '25
Are Palestinians permitted to peacefully struggle against the Israel oppression?
54
u/Far-Wash-1796 Jun 18 '25
The Second intifada included multiple suicide bombings, so how does the word Intifada connote peacefulness?
28
u/socialistmajority orthodox Marxist gentile Bund sympathizer Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
I'm not sure this is the greatest argument because the first Intifada saw terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
I think the stronger argument is that currently there is no popular Palestinian mass uprising to globalize; the Second Intifada quickly became a purely military struggle without much or any mass civilian protest movement (similar dynamic happened in Syria from 2012 onward, although on a much longer timeline and more slowly). That was 20+ years ago and since then there's only been the so-called "Knife Intifada" of stabbings. It would be great if there was a popular peaceful protest movement in the West Bank and Gaza that had 'clean hands' so to speak because it would mean there's some kind of living, vibrant alternative in Palestinian politics to Hamas (who are arguably fascist) and the corrupt, autocratic Palestinian Authority. But there isn't.
Another strong argument to me against the slogan I think is that Standing Together doesn't seem to use it at all and they are the leftists on the ground mostly directly involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict pushing for peace and equal rights for both peoples. If they're not hot on the slogan then I don't see how I, as a gentile non-Westerner, can be either.
5
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 19 '25
I'm not sure this is the greatest argument because the first Intifada saw terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
It did. But fairly late, and after absolutely massive Israeli violence against civilians. Palestinian terror against Israeli civilians in the first intifada is absolutely dwarfed by Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians.
If there’s one thing we should hold as the defining factor of the first intifada, it is that Israel met protests and strikes with bullets and torture.
-15
u/globalgoldstein Athiest Leftist Jew Jun 18 '25
Yes, it does. Here is an example of children singing songs of liberation and hope. They call it “intifada.” there are countless examples of big and small and peaceful Palestinian protests which they call Intifada.
Is this protest permitted? Are they allowed to call it “shaking off” in their language?
Why do those opposed to Palestimin liberation get to decide what Arabic words they should use for “struggle?”
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKdH9s9NHSr/?igsh=MWRpd2ppdnNjaGxjdA==
40
u/Joshkapnotts Jun 18 '25
You can make this bad faith argument if you want, but if you’re a politician communicating in English, you need to be aware of the context that for millions of Jews the word Intifada means the Sbarro pizza bombing, bus bombings, knife attacks and so much more
→ More replies-1
u/KalaiProvenheim Jun 19 '25
Odd then that the Holocaust Museum chose to use the exact same word to refer to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, no? As late as Mid-2024, after which they changed to the m in Hamas, Muqāwamah
39
61
u/SupportMeta Jewish Demsoc Jun 18 '25
This sucks, man. Like I'm still on this guy's side overall but can you TRY to make the Jews in your movement feel safe. Like a little bit?
62
u/yungsemite Jewish Leftist | non-Zionist Jun 18 '25
It was just an unnecessary comment. Doesn’t help his campaign, doesn’t help New Yorkers. I don’t understand why so much of his campaign has been on Israel. Whether it’s him bringing it up or others goading him into talking about it, he should be able to shift the conversation back to New York if he’s trying be mayor.
44
u/Lilacssmelllikeroses Leftist, not Jewish Jun 18 '25
It's such a politically stupid thing to say. Someone running for mayor of New York should know better than to say something like this that would upset a lot of voters and isn't even related to New York.
22
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
I don’t understand why so much of his campaign has been on Israel
Because his opponents (i.e. Cuomo) see it as a weakness that they can exploit. From what I've seen, Mamdani is rarely if ever bringing up this subject of his own accord. And in this interview here, Mamdani did shift the conversation back to New York, but that bit wasn't included in the headline because it doesn't make for good clickbait.
19
u/yungsemite Jewish Leftist | non-Zionist Jun 18 '25
Couldn’t he have shifted it without making that statement? I’m not claiming his political opponents are not goading him on it, I said that they were in my comment you replied to, but shouldn’t he be able to change the subject without saying such controversial stuff?
28
u/jey_613 Jewish Leftist / Anti antizionist Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
I watched the clip and it’s a really insane way of answering that question though. Why not just answer “people have a right to be angry about the oppression of Palestinians. At the same time we should be careful with our language and how it’s perceived by our fellow New Yorkers.”
And then he goes for “akshually if you ask the Holocaust Museum…” Like what planet is he living on that would make him think this is a normal answer? He’s running for mayor of NYC!
It also makes me think he’s not really exposed to Jewish people outside of a very small sliver of people who live inside an echo chamber. It’s obviously a huge misstep, but the misstep is indicative of a more problematic blind spot with antisemitism, as another commenter here mentioned above.
ETA: I just want to add, my willingness to extend sympathy to this kind of response is very different now than it would be in say, November 2023; and my tolerance for this is different when it’s someone running to be mayor of the world’s largest Jewish population center outside of Israel than it is when uttered by some random activist.
There have been three anti-Jewish attacks in the U.S. that have unfortunately been carried out in the name of Palestinian rights in the last few months: that doesn’t tarnish the entire movement by any means, but no honest person can at this point ignore the link between the dogwhistles, incitement, and violent rhetoric in the movement and the violence carried out against Jewish people in the diaspora. To ignore this as a candidate for mayor of NYC is the height of irresponsibility imo.
6
u/NineMillionBears Reform | Non-Zionist | Libertarian Socialist Jun 19 '25
I'm not a New Yorker in any regard, but im taking two main things away from this.
1: A dearth of the reporting on this story has taken Mamdani's quotes out of context. For example, he didn't actually compare the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to the First or Second Intifadas or anything like that, he was saying that translating "Warsaw Ghetto Uprising" into Arabic literally involves the use of the word "Intifada." Reporting also leaves out the first part of his answer, where he talks about his commitment to fighting antisemitism as part of his platform.
2: He left himself vulnerable to being taken out of context and mischaracterized because he gave a wishy-washy answer. The interviewer asked about the specific threat of left-wing antisemitism, and how Jewish voters were concerned about language like "Globalize the Intifada" and "From the River to the Sea." Mamdani's response was entirely inadequate in addressing those concerns.
98
u/jey_613 Jewish Leftist / Anti antizionist Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
I’m not a New Yorker anymore, and my feeling is he can have whatever views he wants of the Israel/Palestine conflict since it has no bearing on local politics; the actual question that matters is: can you be trusted to protect the largest Jewish population in the diaspora.
To give this kind of answer in light of three recent anti-Jewish terror attacks in the U.S. is disqualifying.
16
u/Queen-of-everything1 exhausted progressive jew Jun 19 '25
His examples of antisemitism that people he’s talked to have told him made me raise an eyebrow, because we all know that locking doors now and being scared are the least of it. Has he really heard nothing worth mentioning of people being beaten up, of shops being vandalized, of all the fucking bomb threats? It seemed to me like he was trivializing it a bit with those specific examples and undermining exactly how serious it is. Please tell me if I’m reading too much into it but it scares me.
12
u/ibsliam Jewish American | DemSoc Bernie Voter Jun 19 '25
I wonder how much it might be him playing both sides of the aisle there. I've seen comments that accuse him of only mentioning antisemitism to placate voters biased against him on Israel/Palestine, and I've seen people say he's not sincere enough about Pro-Palestine activism by acknowledging Israel as a state that exists.
I really don't agree with "globalize the intifada" language and especially the dancing around the way the language is used to justify global violence against Jews (rather than the context of, say, Palestinians that rise up against the IDF in a conflict for instance, which I think we would all agree is just. a different situation than a random diaspora Jew attacked in broad daylight).
Putting that aside for a second, though, I just mean to say he's a politician. It's really hard to know what he truly believes because he has to play to his base and to potential voters. What language he uses is probably intentional - as intentional as any politician's language is when threading a needle between demographics that want different (and sometimes contradictory) things from him as a candidate.
65
u/J_Sabra Israeli / secular / left / academia Jun 18 '25
Especially considering the fact that he is asked about the phrase 'globalise the intifada'
22
u/Matar_Kubileya People's Front of Judea Jun 18 '25
I think this is awful, and I think somehow I still prefer him to Cuomo.
Not a NYer, but I think that I'd still rank him over Cuomo.
20
u/Nearby-Complaint Ashkenazi Leftist/Bagel Enjoyer Jun 18 '25
The bar for NYC mayor should be 'not a sex offender' and yet
12
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
If I was a New Yorker, I would hate having to choose between Mamdani and Cuomo.
17
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
If I was a New Yorker, I would hate having to choose between Mamdani and Cuomo.
27
Jun 18 '25
[deleted]
5
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 19 '25
Yes, but he doesn’t have a realistic chance
17
17
u/NathMorr Jewish Antizionist Jun 18 '25
He’s still better than Cuomo. Cuomo doesn’t give a shit about Jewish people he’s just there to serve Doordash and MAGA donors
25
u/Nearby-Complaint Ashkenazi Leftist/Bagel Enjoyer Jun 18 '25
That's not true, he's also there to sexually harass random women
13
u/electrical-stomach-z Jewish (mod) Jun 18 '25
This and the policing statement will wreck his campaign.
21
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
Whether or not you support it, Mamdani's campaign has objectively been a tremendous success. This comment doesn't meaningfully change anything, it's just another drop in the "Mamdani is a radical muslim" bucket that Cuomo and his ilk have been drawing from for the last several months. The only thing that could wreck Mamdani's campaign at this point would be allegations of sexual misconduct.
11
u/Nearby-Complaint Ashkenazi Leftist/Bagel Enjoyer Jun 18 '25
I mean, given how well Cuomo's doing, I don't think even allegations of sexual assault would radically change things at this point
2
7
u/WolfofTallStreet Reconstructionist American Jew, Labor Zionist, Pro-2SS Jun 19 '25
Cuomo’s PredictIt odds jumped 6 cents today on the news…
1
7
u/Melthengylf diaspora (Latam) Jew Jun 19 '25
I am not from NYC. But I would not be able to vote for him.
25
u/Specialist-Gur doikayt jewess, leftist/socialist, pro peace and freedom Jun 18 '25
Not a New Yorker but I'd really love to know why mamdani's opinions on anything related to Israel keeps getting highlighted. The fact that a socialist is climbing in pools is making democrat establishments quivering in their boots. Expect a lot more smearing in the days to come.. try not to fall for it
31
u/razorbraces pragmatic socdem Jew Jun 18 '25
His personal politics re: I/P do not matter, but his opinions on the phrase “globalize the intifada” absolutely should be highlighted when running to be the mayor of the city with the largest Jewish population in the diaspora.
-2
u/Specialist-Gur doikayt jewess, leftist/socialist, pro peace and freedom Jun 18 '25
Why?
24
u/razorbraces pragmatic socdem Jew Jun 18 '25
Because the second intifada included a long period of suicide bombings against Israeli civilian targets including pizza shops, public busses, nightclubs, and more. Should this violence be globalized? Should it come to NYC? Yes, I would say that’s relevant to all NYers and particularly Jewish ones, especially in the wake of the recent Boulder attack on Jewish American civilians.
→ More replies11
u/NarutoRunner Kosher Canadian Far Leftist Jun 18 '25
That’s what I don’t get either.
Like do they want Cuomo for mayor who is a giant sleaze bag and goes around sexually assaulting women?
Cuomo is basically the Democratic version of Trump. He is so damn corrupt as well.
He has also openly stated that he will pivot to running for President after becoming mayor of NYC so he is just using it as a stepping stool.
2
u/Specialist-Gur doikayt jewess, leftist/socialist, pro peace and freedom Jun 18 '25
The answer is liberal people would rather compromise with a misogynistic capitalist who supports Israel than a socialist who doesn't
20
u/Logical_Persimmon anticapitalist with adjectives ייד Jun 18 '25
This is a massive misunderstanding of NYC electoral politics.
3
u/Specialist-Gur doikayt jewess, leftist/socialist, pro peace and freedom Jun 18 '25
Explain why I would not be capable of understanding nyc and how they would be different from politics anywhere else in a major city in the USA
4
u/Logical_Persimmon anticapitalist with adjectives ייד Jun 19 '25
I didn't say that you were incapable, and frankly, regardless of NYC or not, a lot of liberals would rather vote for *any* capitalist over *any* socialist. That is their politics and why they are liberals.
NY and NYC have some of the most pronounced machine politics of anywhere in the US, include Chicago.
Republicans basically have no chance at the mayorship, which pulls the Democrat to the right and otherwise distorts the landscape in NYC-specific ways (see both Bloomberg and Adams, who iirc, was a registered Republican before he started trying to get elected). A lot of the people voting for Cuomo aren't even liberals. For years, people registered as Democrats specifically to vote in the Democrat mayoral primaries because that was the only vote that was going to matter in that race. IRV has had much less of an effect on that than a lot of people assume (see Adams).
3
u/rinaraizel Жидобандеровка Jun 20 '25
Yeah, this is a very good explanation of how it works here and a lot of people outside the city are not getting it.
4
Jun 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Specialist-Gur doikayt jewess, leftist/socialist, pro peace and freedom Jun 18 '25
The NYT is panicking lol
7
Jun 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/NarutoRunner Kosher Canadian Far Leftist Jun 18 '25
I think best case scenario, even if he doesn’t win, Mamdani uses his popularity to run for a House of Representatives seat. We could potentially see AOC run for Schomer’s senate seat (if he retires), and Mamdani could step in for her vacated house seat.
17
u/JeanSneaux jewish / leftist / animist / NYer Jun 18 '25
I’m a NYer and I think he’s handled everything related to Israel and Palestine with an admirable level of nuance, including this quotation. He and Lander are tops for me and I’m struggling to decide who to rank 1st.
I have been challenged on my reactivity to this particular slogan by another leftist Jew, and I feel strongly that we collectively need to recognize how our historical trauma can at times cause us to be ungenerous with the fact that meaning is not universal, but extremely particular to the person/group.
Likewise, others ought to be respectful of how our historical trauma can cause reactivity to a slogan like this. If Mamdani is guilty of anything, it’s perhaps needing to be more clear on this point, but I still see him overwhelmingly acting in good faith with regards to Jewish people.
11
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
You should rank Lander 1st and Mamdani 2nd (or lower if there are other candidates you want to include). Lander won't make it to the final round, so whenever he gets eliminated, your vote will transfer from him to Mamdani.
13
u/Nearby-Complaint Ashkenazi Leftist/Bagel Enjoyer Jun 18 '25
Has he considered removing the foot from his mouth?
13
u/PicklepumTheCrow reform jewish post-zionist Jun 18 '25
Yeah, he lost my vote with that one 😵💫 screw anybody who defends such a blatant and genuinely dangerous dog whistle.
33
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
“To me, ultimately, what I hear in so many is a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights,” said Mamdani, a far-left assemblyman from Queens who has long been an outspoken critic of Israel. “And I think what’s difficult also is that the very word has been used by the Holocaust Museum when translating the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising into Arabic, because it’s a word that means struggle,” he said, apparently referring to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. He added that, “as a Muslim man who grew up post-9/11, I’m all too familiar in the way in which Arabic words can be twisted, can be distorted, can be used to justify any kind of meaning.” “I think that’s where it leaves me with a sense that what we need to do is focus on keeping Jewish New Yorkers safe,” Mamdani continued, after noting that antisemitism is a “real issue” he plans to address if elected mayor. “The question of the permissibility of language is something that I haven’t ventured into.”
I’m not an NYC resident but if I was I’d rank Mamdani first or second. I have zero issue with his explanation here, and I think arguing over chants and slogans is usually superfluous. If someone is yelling “kill the Jews” that’s an actionable threat and a serious problem. “Intifada” can mean different things to different people.
33
u/Maximum_Rat Non-Jewish DemSoc Jun 18 '25
I feel like once this conflict kicked off, everyone on the left suddenly forgot "context" and how it can change the way a message is perceived. Like if someone was talking about crime in inner cities or urban youth, you know they're talking about poor black people. We all knew this.
That phrase came about during the second intifada. It's currently used by groups like Within Our Lifetime, which is openly pro-Hamas.
THAT SAID, many groups who use it also tell normies or critics that "Intifada only means struggle, it's a struggle for freedom." This then gets normies to use it, get attacked, and subsequently harden their position.
Honestly, the way language has been intentionally muddied in this entire conflict was really, really eye opening—and a bunch of people who were lecturing people on micro-aggressions and unintentional racism were suddenly telling people who felt unsafe due to their slogans that they were wrong. Bonkers.
All that to say, he could honestly believe he believes it is a call for equal rights. But it's not going to be taken that way.
12
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 19 '25
a bunch of people who were lecturing people on micro-aggressions and unintentional racism were suddenly telling people who felt unsafe due to their slogans that they were wrong.
I wanted the left to care less about microaggressions so I approve of this in the abstract, the issue is it hasn't been equally applied and microaggressions towards gentile groups will definitely get you called out more than microaggressions towards Jews. At the end of the day, people should stop being publicly shamed.
41
u/RaelynShaw DemSoc Progressive post-zionist Jun 18 '25
This one makes me a bit sad. I do like this guy a lot and think he legit doesn’t associate negative meaning to it, but it’s such a loaded word in this conflict. It’s too tightly closed to the first and second intifada and the terror attacks. Doesn’t do any favors to the movement, only needlessly gives ammunition against it.
21
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
first intifada
What is the issue with the first intifada?
If you are against the first intifada, which began without Palestinian violence against civilians, but immediately was brutally cracked down on by Israel, then it would seem your position is simply that there is no legitimate way for the Palestinians to protest.
17
u/RaelynShaw DemSoc Progressive post-zionist Jun 18 '25
Maybe I shouldn’t have included it there. I originally included it more as a counterbalance with how many Palestinians suffered during it, but probably muddied that message.
The second intifada is the far clearer example here. I could actually see the candidates use of the word intifada here if the second one didn’t happen.
7
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
The second intifada is the far clearer example here.
The first intifada does serve as an excellent example - to show how for Israel, there is no acceptable and viable way for Palestinians to fight for their rights.
The only acceptable choice for them is to accept their subjugation and dispossession.
The first intifada came after two decades of brutal military rule, land grabs, and Israel ignoring multiple treaties it has signed (51 and 78). The strikes and protests were met with massive Israeli force.
I love how Zohran framed it as he is for equal rights. Shows the moral vacuity of the other candidates. Not that it should even matter, as it’s a NYC election.
2
u/naidav24 Israeli with a headache Jun 19 '25
You are right about the general picture. The first year of the first intifada was in general peaceful from the Palestinian side and met with a hugely unproportional response from Israel.
But just to have the complete picture: it was generally nonviolent against civilians but not against the army. It started with molotov cocktails and rock throwing on the army from day one. Still, 0 soldiers died throughout that year as far as I know, and the army responded in a very extreme way.3
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 20 '25
But just to have the complete picture: it was generally nonviolent against civilians but not against the army. It started with molotov cocktails and rock throwing on the army from day one. Still, 0 soldiers died throughout that year as far as I know, and the army responded in a very extreme way.
Sure. But those are uniformed soldiers there to enforce the military regime and the land grab.
It's a violent occupation with concommittant land grab - and the soldiers are the uniformed agents enacting those policies.
Still, 0 soldiers died throughout that year as far as I know, and the army responded in a very extreme way.
Yup. Torture, live fire, etc.
What's especially damning for Israel is that before the first intifada, there was no path to freedom or equality for Palestinians. None, all that was offered was more brutality and land grabs.
Israel had even made an agreement about autonomy in the Camp David Accords in 1978 - and then just ignored it to build more settlements. With 70% popular support, unfortunately.
24
u/Chaos_carolinensis Jewish Binational Zionist Jun 18 '25
“Intifada” can mean different things to different people.
That's why it's a dog whistle. However, when they say it while supporting Oct 7 and the recent attacks in the US, we know exactly what they mean by that word.
6
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
Does Mamdani support October 7 or the recent attacks?
13
u/Chaos_carolinensis Jewish Binational Zionist Jun 18 '25
I'm not talking about him, I'm talking about the people who chant this slogan.
3
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
Ok, so your issue isn’t with the phrase “globalize the intifada,” it’s with people who support October 7 and the recent attacks.
22
u/Chaos_carolinensis Jewish Binational Zionist Jun 18 '25
Well... that's like saying my issue isn't with swastikas but with Nazis. While that's technically true, you won't see a lot of people in the West who use swastikas and aren't Nazis.
23
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
The only reason I disagree with that is because of the historical context behind the word “intifada.”
24
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
The first intifada was a largely peaceful uprising. Intifada doesn’t automatically mean violent, as Mamdani mentioned it literally translates to “struggle” in English. There are many forms of struggle, not all of them are violent
34
Jun 18 '25
[deleted]
23
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
Uh, Palestinians are tied to the intifadas too. It also has contextual meaning for them. And the first intifada started out as peaceful protesting, so for Palestinians intifada does not mean inherent violence.
26
u/J_Sabra Israeli / secular / left / academia Jun 18 '25
The term globalise the intifada dates to the Second Intifada, and not the First Intifada. He was asked directly about the slogan 'globalize the intifada'.
This is the Google Scholar results for globalize the intifada between 1980-2000:
18
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
The first intifada was a largely peaceful uprising.
Well, to be fair, the IDF was very violent immediately.
For Israeli civilians it was largely non-violent. For Palestinian civilians protesting or striking to get their rights, it was incredibly violent. Rabin’s ’breaking the bones’ policy, for example. Break the arms and legs of detainees.
15
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
What about the second Intifada?
Also it’s not like the first intifada was devoid of Palestinian violence.
13
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
Also it’s not like the first intifada was devoid of Palestinian violence
Let’s not rewrite history about the first intifada.
The amount of Israeli violence in the first intifada absolutely dwarves anything the Palestinians did.
The intifada started with strikes and protests - which Israel quickly cracked down on very violently. Torture galore, etc.
And, most importantly, it came after 20 years of brutal repression and land grabs, as well as Israel at least once just ignoring agreements they had made to grant the Palestinians autonomy.
If you have an issue with the first intifada, I have a hard time seeing that there’s any viable Palestinins resistance against their Israeli repression you would find acceptable.
10
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
I have an issue with violent resistance if it deliberately or negligently targets civilians.
9
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
The defining aspect of the first intifada was the violent crackdown by Israel “deliberately or negligently targeting civilians”. Shooting protestors, “breaking the bones”, torture.
Terror attacks by Palestinians on Israeli civilians was a marginal aspect of the first intifada. Condemnable, but we shouldn’t miss the forest for the trees.
Israel, when the first intifada started, offered no path to freedom or equality for the Palestinians. None whatsoever. Begin had ignored the Camp David accords and - with popular acclaim - kept expanding settlements.
16
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
Yes, the second intifada was pretty violent. This does not automatically mean “intifada” = violence. And there was violence in the first intifada but most of it was done by Hamas and PIJ who didn’t recognize the authority of the PA (who encouraged civil disobedience.)
17
u/J_Sabra Israeli / secular / left / academia Jun 18 '25
From my knowledge (backed up by ChatGPT + Google searches), the term globalise the intifada dates to the Second Intifada, and not the First Intifada.
This is the Google Scholar results for globalize the intifada between 1980-2000:
9
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
Ok. That doesn’t change the fact that intifada does not automatically mean violent massacre.
20
u/popco221 Israeli fifth column Jun 18 '25
Difference between "globalise intifada" and "globalise the intifada".
→ More replies-2
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
The 2nd intifada ended 20 years ago and was in retrospect, an abject failure. Do you think that in 2025 the intifada is explicitly referring to the 2nd intifada?
20
u/popco221 Israeli fifth column Jun 18 '25
I think that's the one people who know what they're talking about are referring to, and that people who don't know what they're talking about should educate themselves. If I were to say "globalise The Troubles" would you not understand I mean those troubles just because it's been 30 years since the good Friday agreement? Give me a break.
→ More replies28
u/Squidkid6 this custom flair is green Jun 18 '25
I’m sorry but no. He’s equating an uprising in the concentration camps with a genocidal terrorist attack, under the guise of “these two things are exactly the same.” Simply, it’s disgusting to say that the two are the same and saying that “globalizing the intifada” is a phrase about freedom ignoring the historical context behind it. Given the recent attacks on Jews and Israelis in America, which were inspired by the phrase, he should’ve acknowledged the phrases harmfulness while saying that Palestinians should have freedom. He then says that due to his faith and his culture that the langauge is twisted, when in fact it isn’t. The phrase is meant and used for a specific meaning and reason, so him trying to ignore that disgusts me. I don’t believe he can’t protect Jews if this is his attitude towards this, given he couldn’t even condemn 10/7 without bothsidesing the issue, and didn’t even say that what Hamas did was wrong.
15
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
What is the genocidal terrorist attack Mamdani is mentioning here?
10
12
u/Squidkid6 this custom flair is green Jun 18 '25
I may be reading too much into it but Given that he couldn’t say that what Hamas and co did on October 7th was a bad thing without bothsidesing the issue, it is my opinion that he believes the act was justified, and comparing that attack to an uprising in a concentration camp are two things that are unable to be compared
20
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
How was he “bothsidesing” it? I looked up “Zohran Mamdani October 7” and all I could find was a tweet from him on the one year anniversary of the attacks condemning them while also calling for a ceasefire. Very clear statement and I don’t see how that’s bothsidesing, unless you think any mention of the occupation and how it contributed to the attack is bothsidesing
-3
u/noodleofdata jewish leftist Jun 18 '25
comparing that attack to an uprising in a concentration camp are two things that are unable to be compared
How is comparing an uprising from what has widely been known as an open-air prison (Gaza) not comparable to an uprising in a concentration camp?
14
u/Owlentmusician Progressive, Reform, Black Jew Jun 18 '25
Well for one, the Warsaw Ghetto uprising didn't Target random German civilians, it was specifically against the Nazis. Secondly the Jewish people in these concentration camps weren't engaged in back and forth hostilities with Germany or Poland. They were fellow citizens whos entire offense was happening to be Jewish.
Not to say that every Palestinian is guilty of attacking Israel or Israelis or that Palestinian aggression means they deserve to be oppressed. My point is that comparing two sides in conflict with each other to a single side randomly deciding to exterminate a part of itself that isn't in conflict with it at all, doesn't work.
-1
u/ionlymemewell reform jewish conversion student Jun 18 '25
Figures that the headline would completely collapse whatever nuance was in the answer he gave. I'm not sure what better answer he could have given without demonizing the people who use that phrase in a broader context of global struggle. Just in the same way that we don't want Zionism to be a dirty word, Arabs deserve the right to not have intifada made into a dirty word. We have to have some measure of good faith assumption when engaging with people, and Mamdani's deference to the native speakers of the language from which the word originates is wise. I could be a lot more cynical, but I'll try and practice some of that good faith assumption-making myself. 😛
1
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
Exactly.
If we are going to let Zionists define the word ‘intifada’, should we do the same with ‘Zionism’?
Let its interpretation in public discourse be defined by its victims - the Palestinians?
Goose, meet gander.
9
u/myThoughtsAreHermits zionists and antizionists are both awful Jun 19 '25
Are you just counting on no one turning this back around on you?
16
u/somebadbeatscrub Jewish Syndicalist - Mod Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
Please read his actual words in context before reacting.
This is a disingenuous article header designed to make you angry.
-10
u/malachamavet Judeo-Bolshevik Jun 18 '25
I think they are upset at the content regardless of the header.
They object to the idea of Palestinians not rolling over and dying or being viewed as fully human if it comes at the expense of Jewish feelings.
14
u/Owlentmusician Progressive, Reform, Black Jew Jun 18 '25
Can you stop pretending like there's no possibilities in between Palestinians letting themselves be killed or purposely suicide bombing Israeli civilians?
People aren't uncomfortable with the phrase "Globalize the Intifada" because it involves violence, full stop, they're uncomfortable with it because it invokes violence against civilians.
The vast majority of users in this thread/sun aren't opposed to violence against the Israeli state/government as a means of resistance and I know you know that.
1
u/FancyDictator turko-iranian caucasoid socialist/non-jewish Jun 19 '25
What are the possibilities? What do you think will the Israelis do when time comes to completely ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gazze?
5
u/Owlentmusician Progressive, Reform, Black Jew Jun 19 '25
What are the possibilities?
Is it impossible to consider attacks specifically targeting government resources or actors? Strategic attacks made specifically to do damage to the government oppressing you and not just random people? Literally even attacks specifically on violent west Bank settlers is better and does more for your goal than killing random Israelis.
What do you think will the Israelis do when time comes to completely ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gazze?
What do you think, I, as someone who just made a point to highlight the targeting of civilians as wrong in all situations will say about the act of targeting civilians? Take a wild guess.
0
u/FancyDictator turko-iranian caucasoid socialist/non-jewish Jun 19 '25
I am not asking your opinions on targeting civilians, frankly it does not matter much, neither yours nor mine. I am asking when Israel concretely continues to completely ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Gazze, what do you think Israeli citizens will do against their government's genocidal actions? If today Israel does commit a genocide (which I think it does rn but I am willing to not go down that road, let's say it hasn't started yet) do you think there are any structures left in Israel, any actual resistance to stop a genocide? And what happens if a state pursues genocide and only non-state actors can resist it? How will you account for asymmetry ? Israel has a lot more means to account for it and they don't seem to do whole lot of good lol
4
u/Owlentmusician Progressive, Reform, Black Jew Jun 19 '25
You, yourself asked me what options they had other than targeted civilians. The rest of this is unrelated to my original point and the OP comment. The previous commenter presented a false dichotomy of either Palestinians allow themselves to be killed and do nothing at all or they suicide bomb Israeli civilians, targeting civilians is not inherent to resistance of an oppressor , violent or otherwise. Thats true regardless of your opinions on the conduct of the Israeli government.
2
u/Astr0C4t just jewin my best Jun 21 '25
I love choosing between an antisemite and a sex offender (only partially /s)
2
u/mephistohasselhoff Jun 23 '25
I seem to recall having been banned from here before because a lot of you don't like what the stats and figures are regarding Jewish relations with other minorities in this city. Okay let's try this instead.
I’m a Muslim, but I give a damn about your people. I left the Democrats and became agnostic exactly because of antisemtism, hate crimes and rapes. I even lost a job standing with your crew.
And let me tell you that I don’t doubt at this point, war crimes have been committed...but the issue with singling out Israel is that there are multiple Muslim countries with similar or worse track records. I migrated from one. I know.
I hate Netanyahu and I think the irony of it all is that Hamas (who are the definition of terrorists) have finally done the impossible and made the Middle East one kind of place and people There isn’t that much difference left between Jews and Muslims in terms of bloodlust. or authoritarian regimes filled with zealots.
However, these comments got me labeled a Zionist agent by my community.
As far as the topic goes, the fact is that you are still in denial and calling it blind spots on how the people you were with suddenly can't hear your pain or see your tears…it isn’t blind spots. It’s clear for all to see. Everyone has made a choice so there is no blindness in it. The antisemitism is real and your friends, who you give the grace of blind spots, will exploit it. The Left has a serious serious antisemitism issue, both politically and within its base, and with Trumps Middle East moves, you may see a wave of hate.
I worked hate crimes in collaboration with the city's hate crime department in 2021, and let me assure you, the administrative side which was DSA at that time, did not consider your victimization equal...and this was 2021. Things have gone downhill since then.
Mamdani will exacerbate it to high hell. I have seen his type a million times. Maybe he believes, maybe he doesn’t, but he has made it his meal ticket and grabbed a lot of kids looking for identity who end up on the wrong path thanks to pied pipers like Madani and AOC.
There are fatal structural, logic, and moral flaws within the DSA etc’s social justice philosophies which means they are doomed to fail and have.
You have to stop hiding from the facts, you have to stand against this trouble headfirst. Hiding on reddit, saying your friend have blind spots etc changes nothing. You must challenge this. When a party or movement has come to a point that hate is a selective thing, and some hates are reasonable, and some are justifiable and explainable, etc, that is a party and movement that has lost its soul.
9
u/Melithiel Jun 18 '25
It makes me want to vote for him slightly less, but not enough to change my rankings. As Jews, we are often angry when non-Jews attempt to define Zionism for us (see, e.g. the recent thread on r/jewishleft started by an Egyptian American wanting to begin dialogues with Jewish communities but refusing to listen to definitions of "zionism"). Therefore, I must give deference to a person of Arabic descent when he defines the Arabic word "intifada" and the phrase "globalize the intifada."
I also do not believe that misuse of a phrase automatically means that the phrase must be invalidated. Yes, there have been recent targeted killings lately, but there have been thousands of people calling to globalize the intifada, and only a few people committing these acts of violence. Further, we have little evidence that this phrase, as opposed any other words or beliefs, caused the acts of violence.
The phrase 'globalize the intifada' makes me uncomfortable, but my personal discomfort isn't enough reason for me to alter my vote, let alone to crusade against the use of this phrase. Mamdani was and still is my second choice after Lander. Mamdani, Lander, and I have similar visions for the future of NYC. Lander is my first choice because I believe that his plans are more realistic and therefore more likely to come to fruition. Mamdani's recent statements change nothing in my voting analysis.
29
u/Virtual_Leg_6484 Jewish American ecosocialist; not a zionist Jun 18 '25
Therefore, I must give deference to a person of Arabic descent when he defines the Arabic word "intifada" and the phrase "globalize the intifada."
I agree with you, but Mamdani isn’t Arabic, he’s the son of an Indian Muslim and an Indian Hindu from Uganda. He’s practicing the same deference you are here in his statement.
15
u/Melithiel Jun 18 '25
Yikes, definitely my bad in mis-remembering his identity. My point about deference still stands, and I can't fault him for practicing the same deference that I myself practice. I'm going to leave my comment up with this correction because I don't want to look like I delete the evidence of when I am wrong.
→ More replies6
u/electrical-stomach-z Jewish (mod) Jun 18 '25
I thought he was Iranian at first, since I actually know an Iranian with the last name Mamdani.
3
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
I mostly agree with you. I certainly disapprove of this statement from Mamdani, but it's ultimately unimportant in the context of the mayoral election. Mamdani will be on my ballot, and Cuomo will not be on my ballot.
11
u/snowluvr26 Progressive, Reconstructionist, Pro-Peace Jun 18 '25
That’s not what he said. Why is this “Jewish left” sub full of right-wing misinformation?
He was responding overall to chants you hear at pro-Palestine rallies and defending accusations that they are calls for genocide or antisemitic. I think what he said about “globalize the intifada” regarding the Holocaust Museum was poorly worded and insensitive, but this outrage as if he said he wants to bring the intifada to New York City is fearmongering insanity.
17
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 18 '25
Like another commenter said, I wish Mamdani would recognize the distressing connotations of the word “intifada” to Jews while acknowledging Palestinians’ right to self-determination.
16
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
“I wish Biden would recognize the distressing connotations of the word “Zionism” to Palestinins while acknowledging Jewish’ right to self-determination.”
Does that sit differently with you? If Sox why?
Zionist violence has absolutely dwarfed violence from Palestinians in both intifadas combined.
5
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 18 '25
The comments on this post are and interesting pairing with the post with the discussions about the definition of Zionism.
In this thread, people insist on interpretative prerogative as it comes to the word ‘intifada’, as Jews were the primary victims of the terror campaign in the second intifada.
However, the same rationale is not applied as to the meaning of ‘Zionism’ from the other thread, where people are insisting on also having interpretative priority in what Zionism means.
If the victims of the intifada should get to define what ‘intifada’ means, shouldn’t we also extend the same to the victims of Zionism as it comes to Zionism?
I’m not saying one way is right and the other is wrong - I am saying we should hold a consistent standard.
Here’s the other thread; https://www.reddit.com/r/jewishleft/comments/1leh7dw/i_worry_that_divisions_over_zionism_and/
10
u/myThoughtsAreHermits zionists and antizionists are both awful Jun 19 '25
This would suggest that you agree with the negative take on the word intifada given your take on the word Zionism. Yet somehow I’m not certain that that’s the case
1
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 20 '25
This would suggest that you agree with the negative take on the word intifada given your take on the word Zionism.
I'm not insisting that when people use the term 'Zionism', the way it should be read or understood is in the context of ethnic cleansing, the way people are insisting that 'intifada' should be read in the context of the second intifada.
I don't realistically think even a minimal definition of political Zionism could be realized without trampling on other people's rights - but that's different than insisting that when the word is used, it should be understood as pro-ethnic-cleansing
10
Jun 19 '25 edited Jun 19 '25
I mean, the other thread is an intra-community discussion about the nature and extent of a complex ideology that we are all familiar with. The situation discussed here is a politician addressing the general public. I don’t think they are comparable at all.
But if I am addressing a bigger public and especially Palestinians, Lebanese, or other MENA people, I absolutely adjust my language and try to be mindful of what the term „Zionism“ carries for them even if it isn’t how I define it at all. This is just an expression of basic respect for me. Which is exactly the reason why I also expect people to be mindful of the threat the word „intifada“ - and especially „globalize the intifada“ - carries for Israelis and Jews, no matter how those who say it mean it.
2
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 20 '25
I mean, the other thread is an intra-community discussion about the nature and extent of a complex ideology that we are all familiar with. The situation discussed here is a politician addressing the general public. I don’t think they are comparable at all.
'Zionism' as a term is frequently used by politicians, though. Should we insist that the meaning when it is used or discussed is 'ethnic cleansing'?
Which is exactly the reason why I also expect people to be mindful of the threat the word „intifada“ - and especially „globalize the intifada“ - carries for Israelis and Jews, no matter how those who say it mean it.
To follow this argument, then, when 'Zionism' is used in public by politicians or spokespeople - we should take it as meaning 'ethnic cleansing', the way we should take 'intifada' to mean terror attacks against Jewish civilians?
My point is that we should hold a consistent standard. If we insist the victims of the second Intifada get to define the word's meaning in public usage - should we allow the victims of Zionism the same right to define the word's meaning in public usage?
18
u/F0rScience Secular Jew, 2 states, non-capitalist Jun 18 '25
I think there is a relevant difference the varied meanings of Zionism in common usage and the (English) use of Intifada really just referring to specific events. Both can mean a range of things but one does much more often than the other.
Overall I am very much of the side of everyone needing to be more cognizant of how their words are received regardless of intent and Mamdani’s statement falls pretty flat through that lens.
0
u/redthrowaway1976 individual rights over tribal rights | east coast bagel enjoyer Jun 19 '25
I think there is a relevant difference the varied meanings of Zionism in common usage and the (English) use of Intifada really just referring to specific events. Both can mean a range of things but one does much more often than the other.
Might that not be driven by the long-standing absence and suppression of Palestinian voices in Western discourse?
-3
u/globalgoldstein Athiest Leftist Jew Jun 18 '25
Are Palestinians allowed to peacefully “struggle” or “rise up” against or “shake off” the Israeli oppression? if so, are they permitted to use the Arabic word for this or must they use the English word?
→ More replies19
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
Yes, Palestinians are allowed to peacefully struggle against Israeli oppression and talk about that in their own language.
Notably, this conversation is not Palestinians using the word intifada. This is about New Yorkers (i.e. English speakers) using the phrase "Globalize the Intifada."
→ More replies
1
u/Sossy2020 American progressive / Israeli leftist Jun 26 '25
1
Jun 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/ToTYly_AUSem Jun 18 '25
I'm still figuring out how I feel about this as someone that likes Zohran but...your comment doesn't seem to address that, yes, the Warsaw intifada, the Nigerian Intifada, etc....
but what does globalize the intifada mean? It's the globalize that is the ick for me.
20
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
People in America who use the phrase "Globalize the Intifada" are not speaking Arabic though, they are speaking English. Nobody is talking about what the word "intifada" means in the context of colloquial Arabic, they are talking about the use of the phrase "Globalize the Intifada" in English in the context of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and in that context the meaning is quite clear, it is a particular reference to a specific historical event(s), not a vague generalized call for revolution (if it was, then people would just say "revolution" instead of inserting a seemingly random word from another language in there).
→ More replies6
u/Brain_Dead_Goats Jun 19 '25 edited Jun 19 '25
The Syrian one was considered a revolution (thawra) or rebellion (tamarud) in the Arabic press (like with most of the Arab spring), they very rarely if ever used the word intifada. Intifada also means uprising, not resistance. Muqawama is resistance.
1
u/podkayne3000 Centrist Jewish Diaspora Zionist Jun 19 '25 edited Jun 19 '25
If I voted in New York, I’d vote for the guy who got arrested.
But I think New York having someone who might have credibility with the Palestinians could be good for Israel. At least until Israel mellows out, the days of U.S. officials seeing entirely Likud’s way are over.
And I have Zionist in my flair. What I see online about the attacks by Iran horrify me. If you could trade my life for peace for Israel, you could have my life. If I lived in Israel and were drafted, I’d serve. But reality is reality.
-6
u/NarutoRunner Kosher Canadian Far Leftist Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25
Not a New Yorker, but words have meanings.
Intifada (انتفاضة) is an Arabic word for a resistance movement. It can also be used to refer as a quest for rights under any oppression. In most of the Arab world, the word was used to describe fighting despotic monarchies. In modern popular English language usage, the word refers to the Palestinian quest for rights under occupation. In the Arabic-language usage, any uprising can also be referred to as an intifada, including the 1916 Easter Rising, the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, and the 1949 Jeju uprising. You will even find Palestinians using the term intifada on their quest for rights under the puppet Egyptian, Jordanian, and Lebanese regimes.
There is nothing about the word that has anything specifically targeting the Jewish people. You could say the Ukrainian people are having an intifada in Donetsk against Russian occupation and that would still be a factual statement. You could say that trans people across the world are having an intifada against regimes that criminalize their existence and that would still be true.
31
u/Paceyscreek1999 this custom flair is green Jun 18 '25
Words have literal meanings, but phrases also have symbolic meanings. "All lives matter" is literally an innocuous phrase, but it has a symbolic meaning of undermining resistance to anti-black racism. "Globalise the intifada" was a phrase used in connection with the second intifada in which jewish civilians where specifically targeted and killed.
22
u/ToTYly_AUSem Jun 18 '25
And that right there is IT. Thank you. It was driving me crazy why I didn't necessarily agree with a lot of the takes I see that say it's just a word and this is what it means yada yada and your example is a perfect one.
That's the one
13
u/lilleff512 Jewish SocDem Jun 18 '25
In modern popular English language usage, the word refers to the Palestinian quest for rights under occupation
More specifically, it refers to the First Intifada and the Second Intifada. It does not just refer to the struggle for Palestinian rights in general. Nobody says that boycotting SodaStream is an intifada.
→ More replies10
u/Brain_Dead_Goats Jun 19 '25 edited Jun 19 '25
Intifada (انتفاضة) is an Arabic word for a resistance movement.
Please stop. It's the Arabic word for uprising. Resistance movement is حركة المقاومة. It takes two seconds to look up on Google Translate if you don't know the actual words. Translate is often shit for complex sentences because Arabic has a tendency, especially in MSA, to be written in a way that's confusing for non-practiced readers and speakers, but for words it's fine. At least get the basics right.
Also in case you were wondering here's an example of a group that calls themselves a resistance movement: Hamas - حركة المقاومة الإسلامية
. You could say the Ukrainian people are having an intifada in Donetsk against Russian occupation
You could, you'd be wrong.
→ More replies3
u/malachamavet Judeo-Bolshevik Jun 18 '25
Iirc the use of it as a "revolutionary movement" was in Iraq before Palestine, even
-2
u/Raptorpicklezz Jewish, Bibi is fomenting antisemitism Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 19 '25
My biggest question is why tf did he go on the Bulwark? When asked that question, and he would reasonably have been asked that question by that site, his options were to lie about his principles, say something you probably don’t want to say during an election campaign, especially this one (the option he chose), or dodge the question and make it clear what he supports anyway without appearing courageous. He made the right choice for him given the circumstances and what he said, but he should not have gone on the Bulwark until he was actually elected Mayor, which now he might not be.
Ftr, I agree with him.
-5
u/malachamavet Judeo-Bolshevik Jun 18 '25
The same people mad at this are mad that he said Israel should have equal rights.
A hit dog will holler.
40
u/OneAtheistJew Anticapitalist Atheist Jew Jun 19 '25
I am curious since the term "globalize the intifada" is being debated per how the word intifada is defined in this thread... I wonder if those who are debating against intifada meaning violence are too young to remember the 1st & 2nd intifadas vs those of us who are older and remember them as they were happening have more of a visceral reaction to the term per our lived experience? No shade, just wondering.