Three Simple Rules for Gaslighting American Jews

Key Findings:

The broader culture of campus protests prioritizes performative activism over meaningful engagement or solutions. Campus protesters are more like cosplaying revolutionaries who take over university spaces, demand special treatment, and alienate Jewish students — all while failing to address the real issues in the Middle East.

Michael Koplow writes a satirical critique of pro-Palestinian, anti-Zionist campus activism. He parodies these movements’ exhibitions of moral posturing, selective outrage, double standards, and implicit antisemitism with three suggested 'core strategies’ campus protesters to use to shield themselves from accusations of bigotry, whilst they simultaneously alienate and target Jewish students who support Israel. Koplow sarcastically welcomes readers to join the “resistance,” whose primary achievement is fostering division, encouraging antisemitism, and perpetuating an oversimplified and biased narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

(1) Use Jews as Shields Against Accusations of Antisemitism

Campus activists strategically involve anti-Zionist Jewish individuals or groups to deflect accusations of antisemitism. These participants are showcased as representative of the entire Jewish community, despite the fact that a majority of Jews feel a deep connection to Israel. This tactic enables the activists to delegitimize Jews who support Israel, framing them as aggressors or extremists, while claiming their own actions are free of antisemitism.

The rhetorical inconsistency in applying this logic only to Jews is obvious. Such tokenism would not be tolerated in other contexts, such as racial or gender-related issues — but it is successfully used to dismiss concerns about antisemitism.

(2) Redefine Peaceful and Non-Violent Protest

Activists stretch the definitions of "peaceful" and "non-violent" to justify disruptive and confrontational behavior, such as occupying shared spaces, physically removing dissenters, and displaying symbols or slogans that glorify violence against Israel. The normalization of hostile rhetoric, such as chanting for the destruction of Israeli cities, is heavily criticized — as is portraying objections to these chants as intolerant or hateful. Signs and chants praising terrorist organizations like Hamas are framed as acts of resistance, while any opposition to such displays is dismissed as oppressive or genocidal.

(3) Ignore Real-World Contexts

Campus activists simplify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, ignoring the complexities of ongoing events, such as the October 7 Hamas attacks, hostage-taking, and the existence of Israel as a sovereign state for over 75 years.

Activists focus solely on Palestinian suffering, while denying or minimizing Israeli suffering, such as the atrocities committed by Hamas. This selective outrage leads to actions like tearing down posters of Israeli hostages, which are justified in the name of justice and fighting oppression.

The activists reject Israel’s legitimacy, and their demands for its dismantling disregard the geopolitical and humanitarian consequences of such a position.