Right-wing anti-Zionism is on the rise in America

By Ralph Leonard, for UnHerd:

• https://unherd.com/newsroom/right-wing-anti-zionism-is-on-the-rise-in-america/

• https://archive.ph/TCrSo

---

Right-wing anti-Zionism is on the rise in America

Most people recognise anti-Zionism as a Leftist phenomenon in America. But they are less attuned to how Right-wingers have adopted the ideology, given that conservatives are frequently assumed to be axiomatically pro-Israel.

Chris Brunet, who made his name through his collaboration with Christopher Rufo in breaking the Claudine Gay plagiarism scandal, has recently publicly split with a number of former comrades and associates within anti-woke conservative circles over the issue of Israel. So pronounced is this rupture that he is now the subject of admiration from far-Right commentator Nick Fuentes and his following of Groypers, while Rufo has today written an essay condemning — without directly referring to Brunet — “anti-Semitic ideologies […] on the fringes of American conservatism”.

According to Brunet, after “years of intentionally avoiding the topic” he became “redpilled” following the mass rape scandal within Israeli prisons holding Palestinian inmates. Another turning point for the journalist came when Republican congressman Brian Mast wore his IDF uniform as a jibe against Democratic representative Rashida Tlaib flying the Palestinian flag.

Even though the bulk of the American Right composed of differing streams — from evangelical Christians to foreign policy neoconservatives and MAGA Republicans — has been and continues to be pro-Israel, there has always been a section which has taken a more critical approach. This is largely under the banner of “paleoconservatism”, a particularly reactionary stream of American conservatism once spearheaded by the likes of Pat Buchanan and Russell Kirk.

Their gripe with Israel is part of a general conflict with neoconservatives, whom they see as more loyal to abstract “globalist” values than to the concrete heritage of the American people, and as giving special consideration to Israel in matters of foreign policy. Buchanan proclaimed in 1990 that “Capitol Hill is Israeli-occupied territory” while Kirk, in a more lukewarm fashion, said of the intellectual genealogy of neoconservatism that “some eminent neoconservatives mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States.”

Leftist anti-Zionism is generally premised on international solidarity with the Palestinians — a small, dispossessed and occupied people whose national and civil rights have been negated by Israel, which ought to be rectified. Beyond that, this outlook views Israel and its conduct towards the Palestinians as symptomatic of a hypocritical, American-led liberal order which aggressively preaches human rights against “official” enemies such as Iran or Russia but sponsors the abuses of its Israeli allies. Because Right-wing anti-Zionism is based on an “America First” nationalist isolationism that holds Israel as a baleful influence on raison d’etat, its proponents oppose the neoconservative stance that the countries have a shared national interest.

Ever since the 7 October attacks which ignited the current bloodbath in the Middle East, the fractures within the American Right concerning Israel have only become more blatant. Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Darryl Cooper and Brunet have condemned Israel in the same vein as their isolationist forebears, thus putting themselves at loggerheads with establishment conservatives such as Ben Shapiro who believe that Israel is defending Western civilisation. Just as the paleoconservatives — wrongly — argued that the Iraq War was fought on behalf of the Jewish state due to the undue influence of the Israel lobby, they similarly claim that Israel’s belligerence is a deliberate ploy to entice America into fighting yet another “forever war”.

It is rational to ask whether wall-to-wall military and diplomatic support for Israel serves or undermines America’s national and international interests. That question is not antisemitic. But some neo-paleoconservatives have tried to attach the issue to a wider narrative of Jewish omnipotence, Jewish disloyalty and discredited World War II revisionism. In doing so, they make the task of distinguishing between opposition to Israel’s military conduct and antisemitism far more difficult.