AOC AND MAMDANI: SHE IS A RADICAL-LEFTIST AND HE'S A COMMUNIST

Don’t be misled by AOC and Mamdani’s fake moderation

The Democrats’ “big tent” includes antisemites, some of whom plan to be its leaders. Unlike the GOP’s Israel-haters, they have a realistic chance of achieving their ambitions. 

 

By Jonathan S. Tobin 

 

JNS

Jul 23, 2025

 

 

 

For the true believers among the radical Israel-haters and antisemites that now dominate the American left, it was a betrayal. The vote Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) cast against an amendment to the annual U.S. defense spending bill that would have cut a $500 million allocation for Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system was harshly criticized by her friends at the Democratic Socialists of America. It even led some of its adherents to vandalize her district office in the Bronx, N.Y. As far as they were concerned, even a vote in favor of protecting Israeli civilians against terrorist rocket fire is tantamount to support for the “genocide” that the group believes is being perpetrated by a state that has no right to exist.

For AOC, it was yet another indication that she has her sights set on being more than just the leader of the left-wing congressional “Squad.”

Much like the Democratic Party nominee for mayor of New York City, 33-year-old Zohran Mamdani, the congresswoman wants to play both ends against the middle when it comes to Israel and antisemitism. Along with 204 other Democrats, Ocasio-Cortez voted against the entire spending bill that provided some aid to Israel as well as funding all of the nation’s defense appropriations. But she chose not to join four fellow “Squad” members—Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.) and Al Green (D-Texas)—and two Republicans, the measure’s sponsor, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), in seeking to end support for the Iron Dome.

The vote on the amendment seemed to signal the creation of a new cross-party group of the most hard-core Israel-haters. But no one should be deceived by AOC’s decision to strike a more moderate tone, even if it was unacceptable to the antisemites of the DSA.

The ‘progressives’ and Israel

If she and the rest of the Democrats’ Progressive Caucus, whose 95 members make up 45% of the Democrats’ 212 members in the House of Representatives, had their way, the United States would not only cut military aid to Israel, but also be condemned for defending itself against Hamas and isolated on the international stage. The Democrats’ base isn’t just “pro-Palestinian” but increasingly open to the intersectional left’s demonization of Jews and Israel, which has been normalized in academia, the arts and mainstream journalism. As a result, all of the energy in a divided Democratic Party that is still recovering from its stunning 2024 defeat at the hands of President Donald Trump and the GOP is now on the left.

And as early polls about the 2028 presidential race show, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro—the Democrats’ only leading moderate seen as a potential candidate for the White House—trails far behind former Vice President Kamala Harris and others, including AOC. While a survey three years in advance can be dismissed as meaningless, the numbers are encouraging for those who think that their party’s grassroots will ultimately be reluctant to recycle someone who was soundly beaten by Trump, like Harris, or nominate inauthentic figures like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or former U.S. Secretary of Transportation under the Biden administration Pete Buttigieg.

AOC is backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who nearly led the Democrats’ left wing to victory in 2016 and 2020, only to be denied the nomination by the party’s establishment. That makes the 35-year-old a politician with a future, whether a run for the presidency or a challenge to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer if he seeks to hold on to his seat in 2028.

She and Mamdani both seem to understand that if they are going to attain high office, then they need to position themselves slightly to the right of their leftist backers. In this way, they hope to avoid completely alienating liberals and moderates, including Jewish voters and donors who may not agree with their radical stands on economic policies and against Israel, but who can generally be relied upon to always vote for Democrats in this hyper-partisan era. Seen in that light, her vote for Iron Dome and the subsequent vandalism at her office by antisemites does her a lot of good.

That’s the same strategy that Mamdani is pursuing as he seeks to fend off challenges from Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York, and incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, both running as Independents, in addition to Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa.

Mamdani has tried to pretend that he is an opponent of Jew-hatred. Of late, he is even willing to say that he will “discourage” his supporters from chanting “Globalize the intifada”—a demand for international terrorism against Jews everywhere—that he has been reluctant to censure. Still, like AOC, he has consistently endorsed the most extreme rhetoric demonizing not merely Israel’s efforts to eradicate the Hamas terrorists who led the invasion of and massacre in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, as “genocide,” but also made clear his opposition to the continued existence of the one Jewish state on the planet.

He thinks all he needs to do to avoid being labeled as an extremist is to pay lip service to opposition to the surge of antisemitism that has led to both violence against Jews and the targeting of Jewish students on college campuses by Mamdani’s fellow anti-Zionists. Indeed, just a few years ago, Mamdani was one of them as chapter president of the anti-Jewish, anti-Israel Students for Justice in Palestine at Bowdoin College in Maine.

Seen in that light, his discouragement of the use of one of multiple antisemitic catchphrases chanted on college campuses is meaningless. Most Democrats have fallen in line behind his candidacy, lest they find themselves out of sync with their party base. He has been pressed by some of them to disavow just one of the litanies of slogans employed by those who don’t merely oppose Israeli policies but view the existence of the only Jewish state on the planet as immoral. The issue is not his position on the use of a single slogan; it’s his effectual anti-Zionism—something inextricably linked to antisemitism. Still, it’s alarming that the party leadership has chosen not to take a stand that makes it clear they think that such a position is disqualifying.

A ‘big tent” party

The fact that most Democrats seem to agree is a troubling sign of the times.

That was made clear earlier this month when Democratic National Committee chairman Ken Martin said on PBS’s “NewsHour” that his conception of the party as a “big tent” included those who advocate globalizing the intifada, even if he personally disagreed with it.

As appalling as that is, it is understandable given the current atmosphere inside his party.

The stands of major Democratic constituency groups, such as the Young Democrats of America, which recently approved a platform falsely accusing Israel of “genocide” and the North Carolina Democratic Party’s call for an arms embargo on Israel, have tied the hands of Martin and the party’s congressional leadership when it comes to ostracizing Israel-haters. Indeed, they know that these symbolic statements, which have no impact on the Trump administration’s pro-Israel policies or the facts on the ground in the Middle East, represent normative opinion among Democrats these days, as polls have repeatedly shown.

So, while it is an understandable concession to the sentiments of what is starting to seem like a plurality, if not a majority, of Democratic voters, it also demonstrates how the Overton Window on acceptable discourse about Jews and Israel has moved in recent years.

Much like the stands of the administrations of many academic institutions that have tolerated and even encouraged antisemitism on their campuses, Martin’s statement is both shocking and an example of the Democrats’ hypocrisy. It goes without saying that he wouldn’t declare that racists who called for violence against African-Americans or Hispanics belonged inside the tent. Moreover, he and other members of his party have always been vocal about the need for their Republican opponents to disavow and condemn any of their members who are extremists and/or bigots.

A GOP problem

Nevertheless, it’s fair to ask whether—given Taylor Greene’s stand on Iron Dome funding and the steady drumbeat of antisemitic agitation from right-wing podcast hosts like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens—the Republicans now have their own Jew-hatred problem.

The Georgia congresswoman’s speech on the floor of the House demanding an end to funding for the missile-defense system that has saved countless Israeli lives was an eye-opener to those who may have thought that hatred for the Jewish state is confined to AOC’s “Squad” mates. Much like the stand of her fellow Republican Massie, MTG’s position can be dismissed as pure isolationism—“America alone” as opposed to Trump’s “America first.” The malevolence toward Israel that she demonstrated was a reminder that antisemitism is the place where the far left and the far right come together.

Given her well-known ignorance of most issues and propensity for saying outlandish things—like talk of Jewish “space lasers” that can only be characterized as stupid—most Republicans have little use for her. But, much like Carlson, she has often been included in Trump’s circle of friends and supporters in recent years. That’s something that ought to worry the vast majority of conservatives and Republicans who remain steadfast supporters of Israel as well as of the president’s tough response to the post-Oct. 7 surge in Jew-hatred that most Democrats oppose.

That said, the question to ask about the willingness of Republicans like Tayler Greene and Massie to make common cause with notorious Democratic antisemites like Tlaib and Omar is whether their faction of the GOP is significant enough to give it any hope of leading it in the foreseeable future. And that is where the real contrast between the two parties’ anti-Israel factions can be found.

The intersectional and virulently anti-Israel faction of the Democrats may not yet be in control of the party, but as the comments of the DNC chair and the refusal of party leaders to disavow an open Israel-hater and an avowed hard-core Socialist like Mamdani, they are clearly afraid of them. While Taylor Greene’s stands and the comments of Carlson, Owens and others on the far right can’t be ignored, there is little danger of anyone who shares their views being in control of a GOP that remains, outside of a few outliers, a lockstep pro-Israel party.

That leaves supporters of Israel with the unfortunate reality of a situation where the Jewish nation has become a partisan issue rather than a matter of a bipartisan consensus. This is a disturbing development for a pro-Israel community that has always sought to build support on both sides of the aisle. But that ideal is simply no longer possible in a political universe in which people like AOC and Mamdani have—unlike Taylor Greene—a far from insignificant shot to ascend to high office underneath the Democrats’ banner.