We need to stop making this about antisemitism.
Not because Jew-hatred isn't real or dangerous—it is. But because when we label these movements primarily as "antisemitic," we miss the actual threat and hand them a rhetorical shield they don't deserve. We let them frame the debate around whether they hate Jews enough to be condemned, rather than what they're actually trying to do: dismantle American constitutional liberty and replace it with authoritarian state control.
The woke left and woke right aren't dangerous because they hate Jews. They're dangerous because they hate freedom. The Jew-hatred is just the tool they use to get where they're going.
The Misdirection
When we focus on antisemitism, we're having the wrong conversation entirely.
We debate whether criticizing Israel is antisemitic. We parse conspiracy theories about Jewish influence. We fact-check claims about who controls media or finance. We defend Jewish contributions to society. We educate about the Holocaust.
Meanwhile, both movements advance their actual agenda: transferring power from individuals to the state, from citizens to administrators, from liberty to authority.
The woke left doesn't need you to hate Jews—they need you to accept that "equity" justifies state power to override individual rights, redistribute resources by group identity, and regulate speech and association. The Jew-hatred just makes their target audience more receptive to abandoning constitutional limits on government power.
The woke right doesn't need you to hate Jews—they need you to accept that "national restoration" justifies state power to enforce cultural conformity, restrict participation by religious or ethnic criteria, and subordinate individual conscience to collective identity. The Jew-hatred just makes their target audience more receptive to abandoning constitutional protections for pluralism.
By letting them make this about Jews, we're fighting on their chosen terrain. We should be forcing them to defend their actual positions: that Americans cannot be trusted with freedom and must submit to state authority.
Name the Ideology, Not the Bigotry
The woke left is pushing state-managed collectivism—a system where government bureaucrats engineer social outcomes, redistribute resources based on group identity, and regulate individual behavior to achieve "equity." This is fundamentally incompatible with constitutional republicanism, which limits government power and protects individual liberty.
The woke right is pushing religious or ethnic nationalism—a system where the state enforces cultural and religious conformity, restricts full participation to preferred groups, and subordinates' individual rights to collective identity. This is fundamentally incompatible with constitutional republicanism, which protects pluralism and treats citizens equally regardless of faith or ancestry.
These are the dangerous ideologies. These are what we should be attacking relentlessly.
When someone on the left blames "Jewish privilege" for disparate outcomes, don't get bogged down debating Jewish success. Attack the premise: "You're arguing that the state should have power to redistribute resources based on group identity rather than protecting individual rights. That's collectivism, and it's incompatible with American liberty. Defend that position."
When someone on the right blames "Jewish subversion" for cultural changes, don't get bogged down debating Jewish influence. Attack the premise: "You're arguing that the state should enforce religious or ethnic criteria for full participation in American life. That's nationalism, and it's incompatible with constitutional pluralism. Defend that position."
Make them own what they're actually advocating.
The Common Thread
Both movements want the same thing: your submission to state authority.
One wants a secular administrative state run by credentialed experts managing your life for the collective good. The other wants a confessional state run by righteous leaders enforcing moral order for the national good. Both require you to surrender individual liberty. Both require massive government power to override constitutional protections. Both are fundamentally un-American.
The antisemitism is just the emotional accelerant. It's the narrative device that makes their audience angry enough and fearful enough to accept authoritarian solutions. Jews become the villain in a story whose real point is convincing you to give up freedom.
Stop validating their framing by making Jews the centerpiece. Start attacking their authoritarianism directly.
What This Looks Like in Practice
Stop saying: "That's antisemitic and therefore wrong."
Start saying: "You're advocating for state power to override individual rights based on group identity. That's authoritarian collectivism. Defend it."
Stop saying: "You're scapegoating Jews with conspiracy theories."
Start saying: "You're arguing that America needs ethnic or religious prerequisites for full citizenship. That's authoritarian nationalism. Defend it."
Stop debating: Whether Jews have too much influence, whether Israel is committing genocide, whether the Holocaust is being instrumentalized.
Start debating: Whether the state should manage equity outcomes, whether constitutional protections should yield to collective identity, whether individual liberty can survive the systems they're proposing.
The moment you accept "antisemitism" as the primary frame, you've lost. You're now defending Jews rather than attacking authoritarianism. You're playing defense on their turf rather than offense on yours.
Why They're Dangerous—The Real Reason
These movements aren't dangerous because bigotry is bad, though it is.
They're dangerous because they're building the ideological infrastructure for authoritarian government in America. They're conditioning their audiences to accept that:
Individual rights are less important than collective outcomes
Constitutional limits are obstacles to necessary transformation
Freedom is a problem requiring state management
Pluralism is chaos requiring state-imposed order
Citizens cannot be trusted to govern themselves
Once you accept these premises—whether you arrive at them through "equity" or "national restoration"—you've abandoned the American constitutional project. You've accepted that someone else should control your life, your property, your speech, your associations, and your beliefs.
That's the threat. Not the Jew-hatred. The Jew-hatred is just the delivery mechanism for authoritarian ideology.
The Fight We Should Be Having
We should be forcing every advocate of these movements to answer directly:
To the woke left: "You want the state to have power to redistribute resources, regulate speech, and engineer social outcomes based on group identity. Explain how that's compatible with constitutional limits on government power. Explain how individual liberty survives your system."
To the woke right: "You want the state to have power to enforce religious conformity, restrict participation by ethnic criteria, and subordinate individual conscience to national identity. Explain how that's compatible with constitutional protections for pluralism. Explain how individual liberty survives your system."
Make them defend authoritarianism. Make them explain why Americans should surrender freedom to the state. Make them own what they're actually building.
Stop letting them hide behind "we just want equity" or "we just want to preserve our heritage." Force them to defend state power over individual liberty.
The Real Divide in America
This isn't left versus right in any traditional sense. It's not progressive versus conservative. It's not even really about Jews, though Jews keep appearing in both narratives as convenient villains.
The real divide is between those who believe in constitutional liberty—limited government, individual rights, equality before the law, protection for pluralism—and those who believe the state should have power to engineer outcomes, enforce conformity, and manage citizens for collective ends.
The woke left and woke right are on the same side of that divide. They're both authoritarians. They just disagree on whether the authority should be secular or religious, technocratic or traditional.
Those of us who believe in freedom—whatever our politics otherwise—are on the other side.
Conclusion: Change the Conversation
Stop giving them the antisemitism frame. Stop debating whether they hate Jews enough to be condemned. Stop defending Jewish success or Jewish loyalty or Jewish contributions.
Start attacking their authoritarianism. Start forcing them to defend state power over individual liberty. Start making them explain why Americans should surrender freedom.
Call them what they are: collectivists and nationalists who reject constitutional liberty.
Their ideology is the threat. Their antisemitism is just the vehicle.
Attack the ideology. Ignore the vehicle. Make them defend authoritarianism on its merits.
They can't. And that's the conversation we should be having.
