Civilization and its Enemies
We must align against radical leftists who threaten both Israel and America
Israel has divided the New Right in recent years. Having rejected the neo-conservative case for Israel—that it deserves support because it conforms to global democratic norms—Americans on the right have debated everything from its influence over American foreign policy to its place in Christian eschatology. But in the context of major contemporary conflicts, we propose a simple frame: civilization versus radical ideologues who hate civilization.
Since October 7, pockets of American society have been roiled by debates over Israel. In some circles—especially on college campuses—radicals have openly defended and even praised the Palestinian terrorists. The refusal to condemn calls for genocide against Jews contributed to the resignation of Harvard’s president.
In more moderate circles, we see a wide range of reasonable discussions involving Israel. Some focus on the proportionality or necessity of Israel’s actions in Gaza, and on concerns these may drive waves of refugees to the West. Many are debating American foreign policy toward Israel and the scope of our support. In Christian circles, we’ve seen discussion of dispensationalism and the proper place of contemporary Israel in Christian theology. A few note that Israel has supported Azerbaijan in its war with Christian Armenia. These topics deserve consideration.
But we must not lose sight of the fundamental fact that Israel’s primary enemies are driven by the same ideology as the enemies of American and Christian civilization.
Leftism comes in many flavors. French Revolutionary Jacobinism, Soviet Leninism, Maoism, Christian liberation theology, national liberation movements such as the Palestinian cause, and American campus radicalism are distinct yet recognizably left. They share a consistent theme: resentment, the demand to purify tainted history, and a desire to tear down any civilized society.
The underlying ideology must be opposed wherever it is found.
Make no mistake: the same sort of leftists who stormed into Israel on October 7 and shot more than 1,000 civilians want to destroy stable, well-functioning American communities—especially those inhabited by whites and Christians they identify as enemies of their cause. Such revolution can be advanced extrajudicially, as it was in Israel on October 7 and in American cities during the BLM riots, and it can be done under the color of law, as the arbitrary legal actions against pro-lifers and the secret dispersion of “refugees” across the country show. The academy has always been explicit about the unity of anti-American and anti-Israeli revolutionary projects: Columbia’s pro-Palestinian critical theorist Edward Said referred to James Baldwin and Malcom X as his soulmates.
To be sure, Christians and Jews have significant theological disagreements. There are vigorous philosophical discussions within Christianity, and between Christians and Jews, about the ideal regime. There are debates about the prudence of labels like “Christian nationalism” and their relevance to the American way of life. There are practical political debates. Questions about tactics are always live and lively. Good men can disagree on many questions involving Israel—as they may disagree about questions regarding America.
But no good person can support or tolerate revolutionary leftism.
In all these fights, the radicals are clear about their goals. But others fixate—in both the Israel-Palestine conflict and in contemporary America—on procedural complaints or alleged historical wrongs, and thus undermine any stand against this civilization-level enemy. These critics range from individual “concern trolls” to US/EU/UN officials demanding conformity to globalist liberal norms, and while they may not explicitly endorse the agenda of the Left, they direct their firepower at those fighting the real threats. They play the same historical role of the Mensheviks in the Russian Civil War, “useful idiots,” in the words of Lenin, more concerned with observing legalisms than in confronting the obviously nefarious goals of the Bolsheviks. We have seen what happened in Russia as a result. The same could happen in Israel, and it could happen here.
Ultimately, politics is about practical cooperation toward shared aims—especially protection against common threats. The highest questions of prudence center on recognizing the greatest threats, and forging alliances against them in order to preserve one’s core aims. Such alliances need not be ideological. They are practical, and specific to particular circumstances and shared objectives.
The greatest threat to Western civilization is revolutionary leftism. Palestinian leftists seek to delegitimize and destroy Israel, an outpost of Western civilization. Their ideological cousins seek to do the same in America, by undermining our borders, our family norms, our legal traditions, our churches, and more. The factions are openly allied and celebrate their joint cause.
The Left’s defining hatred of Western civilization is illustrated by its repeated alliances with another enemy of the West, radical Islam. Despite Islam’s seemingly regressive values, the Left has granted it protected-class status both at home and abroad. Democrats widely defended a sitting congresswoman who publicly voiced pro-Islamic, anti-American sentiments, and elite lawyers lined up to offer pro bono support for detainees involved in the 9/11 attacks. It is no coincidence that the Left likewise stands up for the most violent factions in Gaza, as it has for other Islamic liberation fronts. This pattern of leftist-Islamic collaboration highlights how both treat Western civilization as their true enemy.
American Christians should recognize the Israeli state as a co-belligerent in these fights. With the revolutionary Left committed to the destruction of any civilized society, we should appreciate the threat posed by this shared enemy and should support—or at least, not sabotage—actions taken against that enemy.
The moral debate is a central front in this fight. Co-belligerence does not require agreement on every policy or philosophical ideal. But moral delegitimization plays a key role in leftist attacks, something evident in leftist rhetoric about both America and Israel. It is thus prudent, when possible, to align key public moral arguments that effectively challenge these efforts—especially the fundamental good of protecting a civilized society from anti-civilizational forces that would destroy it.
The reaction to the Hamas invasion has awakened many Americans, Christian and Jewish alike, to the extent to which the same ideology driving radical Palestinian violence also pervades American institutions. An alliance to reform our universities is developing. Good. That alliance can be extended to a defense of the fundamental necessity—if America or Israel is to survive—of sound borders, and the need to protect culture, norms, and institutions within those borders against pervasive leftist attacks. We must defeat an ideology that poses an existential threat to both our society and Israel’s.
Image Credit: Unsplash