Why I am not voting for Donald Trump or Kamala Harris

Originally posted by Evan on Medium on November 4, 2024

---

tldr; I cannot, in good conscience, vote for those actively supporting genocide. I also am advocating and organizing alternatives to the two-party system. This is a rough draft, so please ignore any grammatical/formatting errors.

---

I have no plans to vote for either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris in the upcoming election. This should not be too big a surprise coming from a communist, but I do offer more pragmatic considerations. After all, I did vote for Joe Biden in the 2020 election.
The question of Palestine, with its most abhorrent elements on full display for the past year, is the defining feature of this election. There is no issue more urgent and pressing than ending the ongoing genocide. The path forward is clear: cut off the material aid supplying the genocide, hold Israel accountable for its genocidal intent and actions, and make steps toward complete decolonization of Palestine such as upholding the right of return for Palestinian refugees and ending its presence in the illegal settlements in occupied territories. Regrettably, these policies, which just amount to following international opinion as laid out by the UN and ICJ, are too radical for either the Republican or Democratic party to endorse. Seeing that this is the only way forward to providing peace and justice, the alternative that is to be pursued by the United States, no matter which party controls the White House (or Congress), is that of continued expropriation and oppression.

The Palestinian Toll

The most common number to hear when discussing the Palestinian death toll is the Gaza Ministry of Health numbers. As of October 3rd, 2024, this number stands at 41,788 killed since October 7th, 2023, with 96,794 people injured.¹ These figures are largely accurate (owed to the intensive healthcare and surveillance system in Gaza) as well as conservative.² Estimates of the indirect death toll of this conflict, which include deaths by communicable and non-communicable diseases, inflamed by the extensive destruction of healthcare facilities, housing, civilian infrastructure, food production, drinking water, and sanitation facilities, range from three to fifteen times the direct death count.³ Using the most recent figure, the total number of indirect deaths, which are not included in the Gaza Ministry of Health’s number, ranges from 125,364 to 626,820.
While the number of people in Gaza killed by Israel is staggering and deserves attention, those who are injured pose even greater strain on the humanitarian toll of the genocide. According to the World Health Organization, at least 24,090 people have suffered life-changing injuries yet do not have access to specialized care or rehabilitation. Nearly 94% of women and young children are without adequate nutrition.⁴ Malnutrition during the critical developmental period in young children is shown to cause irreparable, devastating physical and neurocognitive damage.⁵ Survivors of the Holocaust still experience the effects of the Nazi’s use of starvation as a wartime tactic of genocide. Malnutrition, which has caused great harm not only for the direct survivors of concentration camps but also to the children born from malnourished mothers, continues to contribute to negative health outcomes.⁶ The Human Rights Watch argues that Israel has deliberately used widespread hunger as a tool for its genocide campaign. Israel has targeted aid workers, supply convoys, and civilians gathered for distribution of aid.⁷ Israeli settlers boast of collective action to stop humanitarian aid from entering Gaza.⁸⁹
The destruction of the human mind is also a goal for Israel. Prior to October 7th, 2023, a truly miserable aspect of the Palestinian existence is the prevalence of trauma and its debilitating effects; children are at higher risk for deep psychological distress but general anxiety was raised due to a plethora of concerns, stemming from both the occupation and more personal matters.¹⁰ Most children have been exposed to the horrors of war already. A 2020 study found that upwards of 90% of children in Gaza had been exposed to some traumatic event and a profound prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms in more than 50% of children and adolescents.¹¹ The rate of suicide has dramatically increased in 2020, with professionals blaming “difficult living conditions, extreme poverty, despair and a lack of freedom of expression”.¹² More than half of Gaza’s child population have contemplated suicide and nearly 60% of children self-harm.¹³ In a 2009 UN fact-finding paper, dubbed the Goldstone Report, testimony cites that 20% of Palestinian children in Gaza have post-traumatic stress disorder and “the symptoms of which ‘will appear over the days, months, years, or decades to come’”.¹⁴ During the Second Intifada, children who had encounters with the violence demonstrated some level of PTSD symptoms, with a majority of the assessments being “severe”.¹⁵ Based on the destruction and collapse of the health system in Gaza, along with the increased state of precarity and insecurity, a majority of those affected will not have access to the required treatment to recover.

The Most Wicked Carousel Ride

Writing regarding the 2004 Presidential election between George W. Bush (R) and John Kerry (D), Todd Chretien saw the world at a historic crossroads, “[Bush] invaded Iraq, Afghanistan and Haiti; cheered on the Israeli war against the Palestinians; shredded our civil liberties with the Patriot Act; and wants to codify his version of the Old Testament into a constitutional ban on gay marriage. He wants to outlaw abortion and doesn’t believe in global warming.”¹⁶ Rather than using Bush’s policies as a pretense to get voters of conscience to vote for Kerry, he instead attacks Kerry for helping Bush light the matches:

He voted for the invasions and wants to send more troops. He promises more, more, more of the same for Sharon’s dirty war, and adds that we should get tough with Venezuela. He voted for the Patriot Act and vows to intensify the “war on terror” if elected. There are, of course, some differences. Kerry does not want to write his anti-gay marriage bigotry into the form of an amendment. He believes in global warming, but thinks any radical action to reverse it will hurt American corporate power. He says he will appoint anti-abortion federal judges, but will follow Clinton’s policy of slowly outlawing abortion to the young and the poor.¹⁷

To Chretien, John Kerry may be less dangerous compared to George Bush, but by abandoning leftist opposition and the political movement to back Kerry we open the gates for him to wreak more havoc. Rather than sacrificing our movement to back the lesser of two evils, we should build one that transforms a “minority affair of protest into a majority tide of power”.¹⁸ In 2008, Chretien boldly wrote that he was not planning on voting for Barack Obama (D). The symbolic victory of Obama does not outweigh, nor could it, the material reality that voting for Obama and the Democrats would lead to bourgeois policy based on American imperialism. Ultimately, Chretien challenges pro-Obama socialists to make a “positive case that Obama and the Democrats will take us closer to breaking the domination of the rich over the working class in this country”.¹⁹ The symbolic victory — a black man elected in the heart of the settler-colonial imperial core — is no substitute for building working-class organizations and a mass movement.
In 2012, Henry Giroux wrote that rather than investing in electoral politics, progressives should instead begin to formulate the conditions that make real democracy and popular movements possible.²⁰ One part of developing these spaces for alternatives is a refreshed and renewed engagement with the social as concept, discovering and appropriating tactics, discourses, and models for a politics of the future. Activists will need to take the role of educators to develop “microspheres of public education” to further civic agency and radical learning.²¹ By 2014, it was clear that Obama was not the savior progressives, i.e. liberals, championed him as. His economic policies favored those responsible for the 2008 housing crisis, his policies on homeland security favored quelling civil liberties, mass deportations, and expansion of surveillance and the repressive apparatus, and his foreign policy amounted to an intensification of the permanent military and imperial state. Giroux writes that liberalism is the new conservatism and both the Republicans and Democrats serve the interests of the bourgeois. He warns that “the reach of violence and death is everywhere permeating the culture like an endless sandstorm that destroys everything it touches,” and that resistance, more than ever, is necessary.²²

Sheepdogs and Spoilers

The Democratic National Committee, likely reacting to unfavorable internal polling, has rolled out TV ads in battleground states attacking Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President. According to DNC Senior Advisor Mary Beth Cahill, Jill Stein is a spoiler candidate and “a vote for anyone other than Kamala Harris is a vote for Donald Trump”.²³ The ad features Stein’s image transformed into Trump as a voiceover likens her to him. The DNC still blames Stein for spoiling the 2016 election by taking voters away from Clinton in battleground states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. Stein responded that they were looking for a scapegoat but “would rather lose the election than end the genocide.”²⁴ Pundits in 2016 placed the blame in a lot of places for Clinton’s loss: “millennial voters”²⁵, “low-enthusiastic black voters”²⁶, “women”²⁷, “a typo”²⁸, “James Comey’s letter”²⁹, “China”³⁰, “arrogance”³¹, “wikileaks”³². And, of course, the main challengers to Clinton’s presidency other than Trump, Bernie Sanders³³ and Jill Stein^.34
The criticism of Jill Stein from the DNC point of view is not on policy, but purely on vibes. They cite different ways Stein is a planted asset, either from foreign powers like Russia or bankrolled by the Trump entourage. Most damning to the Democrats, however, is the opportunity to spoil the election by posing as an alternative to the duopoly. They argue that voters for Stein would most likely vote for Harris if she were not on the ballot, thus Stein’s appearance on the ballot only harms Harris (and helps Trump). To some extent, this may be true, but the underlying framing is disingenuous and leads us to a future controlled by bourgeois opposition.
The most famous spoiler candidate in modern history is Ralph Nader, an environmental and consumer activist and Green Party Presidential candidate. During the 2000 election, Nader received over 2.7 million votes nationwide, with controversy arising from Democrats due to his appearance on the Florida ballots. Florida, the state that would ultimately decide the election, was called in Bush’s favor by 537 votes. The people who called the vote were not the officials in charge of overseeing and counting votes, rather, the Supreme Court of the United States. In counties with a close threshold between Bush and Gore, Florida law demanded a recount to ensure accurate returning of votes. The Bush campaign, who saw that the recount was not in their favor, decided to attempt to stop the vote by suing in Florida courts. The Supreme Court of Florida maintained that the recount must be completed, yet the Bush campaign again attempted to cease the count. The Supreme Court of the United States, in an unprecedented partisan act decided to step in; they eventually found that while many of the voting practices in the Florida election were unconstitutional, it would be more unconstitutional to continue to validate or disqualify votes, thus they ordered for the count to be stopped. As Mark Brodin writes, the decision’s logic is as if “the solution for the de jure segregation of public schools condemned in Brown v. Board of Education would have been to expel the black students”.³⁵ Democrats, following Bush v. Gore, did not launch any meaningful opposition to the decision and opted instead to preach messages of reconciliation and unity. While some representatives sought to protest the electoral process and results, claiming that black voters had been disenfranchised and there was evidence of widespread fraudulent activities, under congressional rules they were unable to debate due to no Senator joining in their protest.³⁶ Democrats had greater vitriol for Nader than they did a quasi-coup through the guise of constitutionality.
Democrats argue that had Nader not been present on the ballot, his supporters would have voted for Al Gore. There is nothing but speculation that Nader’s voters would have voted for Gore, but there is the fact that 300,000 Floridian Democrats voted for Bush, not Gore nor Nader. More than 100,000 self-described “Liberals’ had voted for Bush as opposed to Gore.³⁷ It is clear using this data that any claim of spoiler is simply coping with the failure of Gore to convince his base to vote for him. Nader’s success in building a large coalition for an alternative to the two-party system cannot be construed as a spoiler. Bush and Cheney’s disastrous policies cannot be used to blame Nader, and instead, the reaction to Nader’s electoral failure is evidence enough that the Democrats don’t care about building any sort of different system. Why would they?
During the 2004 elections, well-off progressives and former Nader supporters marched lockstep with “anyone but Bush” in reaction to the Iraq War even if that meant supporting the hawkish Kerry.³⁸ Joe Biden in 2004 blamed Gore’s loss in 2000 on Nader, “He cost us the election last time and his ego may cost us the election this time”.³⁹ The editors of The Nation penned an open letter championing Nader’s accomplishments but ultimately ended with “Ralph, please think of the long term. Don’t run.”⁴⁰ Following Nader’s response, where he highlights the dangers of abandoning the challenge to the two-party system, the editors replied again with “Please don’t run.”⁴¹
Nader’s spoiler status led some to conceive of the “Leninist Nader” theory; Ralph Nader is not innocently campaigning for topics he finds important nor to attempt to breathe new air into third parties, rather he intends for “villainous, right-wing Republicans who will make things worse” to help mobilize the people to demand change. Rather than dealing with the people’s lulled complacency of a Kerry administration, Nader views the “provocateur” role of Bush to be better to organize around.⁴² Further cementing this narrative is the support thrown behind Nader by Republicans in their effort to split Kerry’s base. Republican groups in the swing state of Oregon canvassed voters to sign petitions for the inclusion of Nader on the ballot. Right-wing media outlets published articles endorsing Nader’s campaign.⁴³ Bush megadonor Richard J. Eagan and his posse were reported to have donated to Nader.⁴⁴
Make no mistake, the 2004 election was about the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and in a broader sense, the position of America as the sole acceptable imperialist power in the world. Both Bush and Kerry supported the war and occupation. Both Bush and Kerry campaigned on upholding US hegemony and promised regime change to all those not willing to fall in line. Nader, on the other hand, opposed the Iraq war. Despite the mental gymnastics of Democrats, Nader did not cause the invasion of Iraq in 2003 any more than he caused the collapse of Iraqi society in the 90s due to the US bombing campaign and economic sanctions that targeted civilians. A vote for Nader, either in 2000 or 2004, was placed in the interest of working toward an alternative anti-war platform and breaking from the two party system. Voters for Nader correctly identified Kerry and the Democrats and Bush and the Republicans as two sides of the same coin and rightfully rejected this duopoly.
The damage has been done, however. Gil Troy wrote in Time magazine after Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016, “Senator Bernie Sanders earned the 2016 “Ralph Nader Award” for the Leftist Most Responsible for Helping Republicans Win the Presidency”.⁴⁵ Troy concedes that Trump cleverly exploited voter’s frustrations and Hillary ran an unenergetic and “empty” campaign, but Sanders still pushed her too far left to unify the nation and beat Trump. This, of course, is following Sanders’ deliberate efforts to avoid such a signifier. In a May 2016 piece for Politico, Bill Scher voiced concern that Sanders’ loss could spell doom for the Democrats if he refuses to exit the race and instead runs as an Independent candidate or if he refuses to endorse and campaign for Hillary.⁴⁶ On July 12th, 2016, to the relief of many Democrats and the distress of progressives, Sanders dropped out and endorsed Hillary.⁴⁷ This isn’t much of a surprise, as Sanders has endorsed and campaigned for the Democratic nominee for his entire political career. However, seeing the apparent power of Bernie’s “political revolution” it is understandable how the ill informed and uninitiated may be frightful of a vindictive progressive.
Rather than viewing Sanders as a spoiler candidate, it may be more accurate to view him as a sheepdog candidate. Bruce Dixon wrote in 2015 about Bernie’s job being that of the sheepdog, to “warm up the crowd for Hillary, herding activist energies and the disaffected left back into the Democratic fold one more time… to tie up activist energies and resources till the summer of 2016 when the only remaining choice will be the usual lesser of two evils.”⁴⁸ The sheepdog’s job is to herd leftist activists by running a progressive Democratic campaign in the primaries, only to have them concede to the establishment Democrat nominee and urging their supporters to do the same. This distracts from building an alternative electoral campaign outside of the Democratic Party process and also builds a false image of progressive leadership within the Democratic Party and the ability to use the party itself as a vessel to pass leftist reforms.
Perhaps an even more damning critique comes from Ajamu Baraka’s article on Dr. Cornel West’s endorsement of Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign. Using Dixon’s analysis of Sanders as a sheepdog candidate, going further to critique Sanders’ individual policy positions, Baraka asks why exactly West seeks to channel radical voters to Bernie Sanders. Baraka points out that West was an enthusiastic supporter of the “good and decent brother” Barack Obama, whose record in office proved to be far right of West’s socialist politics.⁴⁹ While West would walk back his positive words for Obama, he still had to answer the question of why he chose to endorse Bernie. Did he believe in Bernie’s ability to win the primaries and become the Democratic candidate? Did he believe in the possibility of pushing major progressive reform through the legislative process using the Democrats, recast, and molded into a progressive party? How does West see Sanders’ foreign policy as a departure from other establishment Democrats and how does West’s ethical framework reconcile with Sanders’ non-ethical actions? These questions may have been answered after Sanders dropped out, with West criticizing Sanders’ endorsement of Hillary and subsequently endorsing the Green Party candidates Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka.⁵⁰
In 2020, Cornel West, although not endorsing Biden and his politics, did urge the anti-fascist vote against Trump. If Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden represent a neoliberal disaster, Donald Trump and the Republicans represent the neofascist catastrophe. Acting in his role as a public intellectual, West’s unifying message of support for Biden ought to be followed with the understanding that any sort of radical leftist change is to come from outside bourgeois electoral politics. West, however, still finds some use in electoral tactics and has launched a presidential campaign with Dr. Melina Abdullah as an independent. At the beginning of his campaign, Colin Jenkins wrote that while there is a zero percent chance of West and Abdullah winning the election, they should still act as if they can. Leftists should be skeptical of the campaign and not use the campaign as an end in itself, but as a tool that can be built upon and/or discarded if necessary.⁵¹ With no end for the West/Abdullah ticket in sight prior to November 5th, there is little justification for designating the campaign as a sheepdog. There is no desire to herd voters to the Harris campaign, and if West were to do so, it could undoubtedly come at a great cost to his legitimacy and legacy as an activist of conscience. Similarly, despite charges of being a spoiler candidate, I have a hard time believing that voters of West would be voting for Harris rather than another third party candidate or refraining from voting altogether.⁵²
The concept of the spoiler candidate is anti-democratic and denies the ability for voters to vote according to their belief system. If there are only two candidates to vote for, there is an entire population forced to make concessions on an endless array of positions. These positions are neither binary nor equally contending battlegrounds. Both Kerry and Bush supporting the war on Iraq leave the anti-Iraq-War position uncontested, much like how Harris and Trump today both are supportive of Israel and its genocide on Palestinians. All of the main candidates are unwavering in their support for a global American empire, the only contentions they make is the varying degrees of aggressiveness it ought to have. All the main candidates agree on the position that capitalism must be nurtured and a flourishing environment for business is good for everyone.

The Financial Price

Researchers working with the Costs of War project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International & Public Affairs released a comprehensive, yet incomplete, accounting of the financial support given to Israel by the United States since October 7th, 2023. The report claims $22.76 billion as the conservative estimate of U.S. military aid to Israel and spending on related regional operations.⁵³ This number is from the combination of total military assistance approved by the Biden administration ($17.8B) and increased expenditures for operations in the Red Sea taken against Houthi fighters ($4.86B). Included in the approved security assistance is aid under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program, transfer of excess supplies through the Excess Defense Articles (EDA) program, drawdowns from U.S. stock, and arms transfers deals approved through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program.
Hartung describes that estimating an accurate total was challenged by the Biden administration’s structuring of the deals, notably that they were broken down into more than a hundred different deals through the Foreign Military Sales program and specifically under the threshold that would require the administration to notify Congress.⁵⁴ In October 2023, U.S. State Department Director in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Josh Paul, resigned in protest of the Biden administration’s transfer of arms; he wrote that he attempted to change policy from the inside, but “there’s no questioning on this one. There’s no space for substantive dissent within the system on this one.”⁵⁵ In August 2024, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken approved $20 billion in new arms sales to Israel.⁵⁶ Despite its approval from the executive, there is still a chance to block the sale using a Congressional Joint Resolution of Disapproval. Bernie Sanders, one of the sponsors of the resolution, has called on Congress to “end our complicity in Israel’s illegal and indiscriminate military campaign, which has caused mass civilian death and suffering.”⁵⁷ It is unlikely to face a vote until after the election.
While Israel is not the only country that receives billions in military assistance through the FMF program (although it does receive the majority), it is the only country afforded generous and preferential treatment from the program. The FMF program is essentially an international subsidy for U.S. weapon manufacturers.⁵⁸ FMF money comes with the stipulation that funds are used to purchase from American companies, however, in 2016 the Obama Administration adjusted the decennial Memorandum of Understanding with Israel to phase out this clause. FMF funds are also made available to Israel as a lump sum payment and are held in U.S. interest-bearing bank accounts.⁵⁹

Israel is de facto exempt from U.S. laws that regulate foreign military assistance, like the Foreign Assistance Act, Arms Export Control Act, and Leahy Laws. The U.S. has placed conditions on recipients of FMF funding, citing humanitarian concerns barred under the above laws, yet has never applied these conditions to Israel. Part of this has to deal with the unspoken rule that Israel plays by different rules. Another part has to do with the biased standard operating procedure that the screening process adheres to. The Israel Leahy Vetting Forum (ILVF) is the group of State Department officials that determine Israel’s compliance with Leahy Laws. All parties must reach a consensus that a potential violation has occurred and must be approved by the Deputy Secretary of State. Israel also must be notified that it is under investigation for potential violations and has 90 days to respond to the review. According to former State Department officials, no other country requires as intensive effort, coordination, and consensus as Israel does.⁶⁰ The closest that Leahy Laws have gotten to being applied came after a review of five Israeli units found that they were implicated in gross human rights violations. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken opposed blocking military assistance to these units because Israel had reprimanded the individuals responsible. For Blinken, community service following the murder of an unarmed Palestinian is an appropriate consequence.⁶¹ In another unit found to have been engaged in violations of human rights including the murder of 80-year-old Palestinian American, Omar Asad, the U.S. continues to work with Israel to “engage on identifying a path to effective remediation for this unit” while working to not “delay the delivery of any U.S. assistance”.⁶²
The United States has no mechanism in place to monitor how funds are spent or what weapons go to specific units, making the oversight and enforcement of Leahy Laws next to impossible. The ILVF also feels particularly useless, because, in a vast majority of cases, it is. The vetting process only accounts for military personnel applying for U.S. training programs, only 0.02%, and leaves the rest of the 99.98% of FMF “untraceable”.⁶³ The Biden Administration has lifted restrictions on Israeli access to U.S. weapon stockpiles, removing crucial congressional oversight and creating a “free-flowing pipeline” of weapons to Israel.⁶⁴ Reducing transparency of these weapon transfers reduces accountability for the United States and Israel, and more importantly, emboldens Israel to take advantage of the constant replenishing of munitions by using munitions at a greater rate.⁶⁵ In response to Israel’s accelerated aggression, the U.S. has made it a priority to accelerate and streamline logistics to ensure speedy deliveries to Israel.⁶⁶
Another major avenue for financial support comes in the form of Israel Bonds. Since the state of Israel began issuing bonds in 1951, Israel Bonds boast over $50 billion in sales and a spotless record of paying accrued interest or principals. Since October 7th, 2023, Israel Bonds have sold more than a record $3 billion in debt securities, with $1.7 billion sold to states and municipalities across the United States.⁶⁷ The surge in financial support comes even after Israel’s credit rating decreased in February and once more late September. Moody cites destabilization of the economy stemming from Israel’s invasion of Lebanon with “no visibility on an exit strategy” and lack of a possibility for a ceasefire in Gaza.⁶⁸
A report from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists found that Israel Bonds embarked on a campaign to court U.S. officials using unethical means. Following October 7th, public officials announced in tandem their support for Israel and their purchase of millions of dollars in new Israel Bonds. Ohio Treasurer Robert Sprague announced on October 11th, 2023, an additional $20 million spent on five-year bonds, “now is the time to stand with Israel.” Pennsylvania Treasurer Stacy Garrity announced that “Israel is our greatest ally in the Middle East, and I will always stand with them,” following the purchase of $20 million in bonds on October 12th, 2023. Palm Beach County Clerk and Comptroller Joseph Abruzzo announced $25 million in new purchase of bonds on October 10th, 2023, and a further $135 million in bonds on October 31, 2023. By March 26th, 2024, Abruzzo claimed that Palm Beach County is the largest investor in Israel Bonds worldwide, holding over $700 million in bonds in its $4 billion investment portfolio.⁶⁹
Israel Bonds has more in common with lobbying firms than it does a typical investment agency. According to the ICIJ, Robert Sprague was one recipient of Israel Bond’s luxurious treatment. Sprague’s relationship with Israel Bonds got him on a trip to Israel to participate in a nationwide tour of military bases, archeological sites in occupied territory, museums, and wine tastings. The trip was also planned for private meetings with legislators and government officials like Eli Cohen, Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Isaac Herzog, Israel’s President. Sprague would have been staying at a five-star hotel in Jerusalem and would have attended galas. In March of 2023, Sprague was invited to an Israel Bond reception in Washington, D.C. with his four-star hotel room and dinner paid for by the agency.
Similarly, Florida Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis has been the recipient of Israel Bond’s lobbying efforts. In 2018, Patronis was commended by the Israeli state for increasing Florida’s ownership of Israel Bonds. In 2019, Patronis and other officials were sponsored to go on a trip to Israel. In 2020, Israel Bonds held a celebration for Patronis due to his legislative efforts enshrining a commitment to buying bonds. In 2022, Patronis was a person of honor at an Israel Bond gala.
It is clear that while the lines have been blurred to say the least, I cannot say that the commitment to purchasing Israel Bonds is wholly based on lobbying efforts. In December of 2023, Israel Bonds formed the Government, Industry, and Financial Services Leadership Group, a group of elected public officials ideologically aligned with Israel seeking to counter the boycott and divestment movement. Sprague, Garrity, and Abruzzo are all part of the group along with other state treasurers like Illinios’ Michael Frerichs and Oklahoma’s Todd Russ. Many expressed comments that align with Israel’s interests. Sprague, the chair of the group, said “We can’t stay neutral. It is very clear to me that if we stay neutral, we are going to benefit Hamas. It benefits the aggressor, the attacker. And I think that is what they want—for everyone to stand on the sidelines and do nothing.” Abruzzo commented that his actions are very much in response to anti-Zionist protestors and conflates them with anti-Semitics, “About two Saturdays ago, right down the street from our office, we had a very large protest of, I would submit, antisemitic individuals… I’m here to say that not only will I not adhere to their calls, we are going to make a larger investment in Israel bonds.” Russ made connections between the United States and Israel “This is about… democracy and what that means to the rest of the world.”⁷⁰
The United States has publicly backed Israel and its project of extermination in Palestine most egregiously for 13 months now. Public treasuries have funneled billions into Israel and weapon manufacturers through federal military assistance programs and Israel Bonds. Despite concerns from Israeli companies and investors, particularly those geographically close to Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, Israel’s technology sector has remained well-funded to the tune of $10+ billion raised since October 2023.⁷¹ There have been significant decreases in foreign direct funding in 2023, with transport, tourism, insurance, and government agency service industries being hit hardest in response to October 7th.⁷² Philanthropic ventures have increased following October 2023, with 350 nonprofits and governmental agencies having received over $1.4 billion in donations.⁷³
The economic toll on Israel seems to be beginning to take effect; economists in the country suggest that the 2023-2025 cost of war for Israel is $55 billion. While U.S. and European aid has certainly helped curb the negative effects, Israel still expects to see declining growth. Experts note that up to 60,000 Israeli businesses may close by the end of the year due to manpower shortages, displacements, logistical challenges, and low consumer sentiment. Israel faces underemployment in agricultural and construction sectors due to the restriction of Palestinian workers.⁷⁴ As resistance to Israel grows, it is expected to incur greater financial and human costs.

Israel at the DNC

The 2024 Democratic National Convention kicked off on August 19th in Chicago. It had all the staple characteristics of national conventions that came before: unabashed patriotism, zealous delegates, and hagiographic homily. Outside, protestors demonstrated against the Democrats just as they had done every convention preceding them.
For some, the DNC was a triumphant celebration of the “Great Vibe Shift of 2024” and Democrats ought to “rave on”.⁷⁵ The Democratic Convention represented a new changing of the guard, where new, younger leaders aim to hold the reins and seize a large portion of an increasingly political youth. Biden’s exit from the race parallels a general feeling that the establishment Democrats are aging mentally and physically, thus precipitating the passing of the torch to the new generation.⁷⁶
For others, myself included, the DNC is more akin to Nero fiddling while Rome burns. The Democrats have put on an impressive party so loud and so intoxicating that it sounds out the noise from outside. The Democrats are war criminals and no ally to me (or any other human). They party in the hope of maintaining power, and if they lose the election, they party knowing nothing substantially has changed. They are not threatened by any material action on the left that dispel the bourgeois class and capitalist logic that dictates the conditions in America (and the world). They party because they have already won.
It is not a new thing for Democrats to uplift Israel and erase Palestinians during the national convention. For example, in 2016, the topic was brought to the forefront of political discourse after Sanders’ answer deviated quite strongly from the boilerplate statements of Clinton. In reference to Operation Protective Edge, or the 2014 Israeli War on Gaza, the moderator asked if Sanders could respond to “those who believe that Israel has a right to defend itself as it sees fit”. The question itself is a good example of the framing of the Israeli-Palestinian question in American politics, yet we find Sanders’ radical take: “All that I am saying is we cannot continue to be one-sided. There are two sides to the issue.”⁷⁷ This is in contrast to ever-Hawkish Hillary, who brought up the need for regime change in Gaza (and Iran), blamed the Palestinians for not wanting “peace” following Camp David, and ultimately affirmed Israel’s right for total defense. Despite Sanders calling himself “100 percent pro-Israel”, his answer still demonstrates a level of reverence for Palestinians that is unmatched by most other politicians in the government. Sanders decided to further the issue by appointing individuals to the Party platform drafting committee, including James Zogby, Cornel West, and Keith Ellison, who would challenge the Clinton position on Israel and could mount opposition to the anti-Palestinian politics of the Democrats. They went into the committee intending to argue against calling Jerusalem Israel’s undivided capital and anti-BDS statements, yet were confronted with a more conservative stance than Bush and Clinton when it came to “occupation” and “settlements”. Zogby alleges that the committee is more afraid of retribution from Zionist Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson than it is committed to upholding international law.⁷⁸ West describes the lost fight:

We were looking to include them [Palestinians] within the platform, so at least it was on paper. Now, of course, putting it on paper is different than putting it in practice. A declaration is different from the execution. But we lost over and over again, because the Clinton people lined up and voted against it… But there’s no way, based on moral grounds, those based on my own moral conscience, that I could support that platform.⁷⁹

There was a visible protest on the floor of the national convention as well. Delegates waved signs and wore buttons “I Support Palestinian Human Rights” and even unrolled a Palestinian flag during the convention as a protest to the DNC’s insistence on Zionist language and policy. Fisher prophesied that “U.S.’ handling of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is unlikely going to be a dealbreaker for most Sanders supporters come Election Day… [but] the issue could end up affecting future Democratic contests.”⁸⁰
It was enough for West to withdraw from the Democratic Party’s corner due to their erasure of Israeli occupation and Bernie’s endorsement of Clinton in 2016. He has put some weight on the incredibly real and active “incremental genocide” carried out through U.S. and Israeli policy.⁸¹ In the face of an escalated campaign of genocide since October 7th, 2023, West has continued to call out Washington’s complicity, even mentioning Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as “war criminals”.⁸² West, along with Jill Stein and Claudia De la Cruz, marched with protestors outside of the convention. He has remained committed to the Palestinian cause and is not herding voters to elect Harris on the presumption that she will be better than Trump. Compare this rhetoric to James Zogby’s, who wrote that “Palestine and supporters of Palestinian rights were big winners during the four days in Chicago.” These victories, “small wins”, took the form of panels discussing Palestinian suffering, a healthy showing of “Democrats for Palestine” pins, and “rousing applause” for pro-Palestine statements.⁸³ I’d argue that Zogby’s tiny victories are purely performative, and knowing the context of what Palestinians lost during the DNC, normalizes Democrats’ support for apartheid and genocide.
What Palestinians deserved during the convention was commitment to an anti-war, anti-imperialist message that demonstrated some ounce of courage and justice. What Palestinians received, however, was the message to shut up and vote. On the first day of the convention, during President Biden’s speech, activist delegates unfurled a banner reading “Stop Arming Israel”. Immediately, nearby delegates began to rip the banner from their hands, some violently hitting Nadia Ahmad with “We ❤ Joe” signs; DNC staff encouraged delegates in the crowd to lift their signs to block the banner, and the lights in their section were lowered.⁸⁴ Nadia B. Ahmad called out LiUNA delegates as perpetrators of assaulting her, further alleging the Florida Democratic Party of revoking her credentials as retaliation for the protest.⁸⁵
Members of the Uncommitted delegation attempted to negotiate with DNC organizers to get pro-Zionist Palestinians on stage. Instead, the Democrats rejected having Palestinian voices present and offered the parents of an Israeli-American hostage time to testify on Biden and Harris’s determination to achieve a ceasefire. When afforded the opportunity to placate a sizeable portion of the electorate, a strategic move would have been to accept the Uncommitted movement’s performative demands and brush off their material demands of policy. Now, by denying Palestinian speakers, Harris and the Democrats bet that they don’t need the support of the Uncommitted movement. More important is protecting their coffers from the wraith of Zionist megadonors like Haim Saban, who has historically donated massive sums to pro-Israel Democrats and has an influence on American policy.⁸⁶ So far the gamble has worked, as Haim has come out in support of Harris and her record upholding pro-Israeli, anti-Palestinian policies and rhetoric.⁸⁷
The most honest actions, and therefore disgusting, come from delegates leaving the convention and being forced to walk through a crowd of demonstrators reciting names of Palestinians killed. Video shows the delegates physically plugging their ears and avoiding eye contact, rolling their eyes, or in some cases making fun of the demonstrators.⁸⁸
Kamala Harris and the Democrats have shown themselves to be extremists. Harris has welcomed endorsements from bloodthirsty hawks like Dick and Liz Cheney and Ritchie Torres, and she channels their ideology into her platform.⁸⁹ During her speech at the national convention, she made a promise to ensure that under her administration, she will oversee the “strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world.” She continued,” I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself, and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself, because the people of Israel must never again face the horror that a terrorist organization called Hamas caused on Oct. 7, including unspeakable sexual violence and the massacre of young people at a music festival.” She finishes with a call for a ceasefire, return of the hostages, and “[Palestinian] right to dignity, security, freedom and self-determination.”⁹⁰
As noted by Abba Solomon, Harris’ statement may differ stylistically from the current administration, but is materially “no different than what President Biden has been saying and doing since last fall while enabling the slaughter of Palestinian civilians.”⁹¹ She is consistent with the party line as outlined in the Democratic Party Platform, which makes no mention of occupation nor any mention of holding Israel accountable.⁹² For some like Zach Beauchamp, Harris’ speech successfully walks between the twin narratives of pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian viewpoints, yet “went much further than even most Democrats are willing to in recognizing the immense and ongoing suffering of Palestinians… She acknowledged that Palestinians have legitimate rights.”⁹³ By acknowledging that human beings have legitimate human rights, Harris rises to the chief humanitarian of the Democrats. Beauchamp argues that her speech is “meaningfully different” to previous stances taken: First, Harris structured her speech to place Palestinian self-determination as the climax, and second, Harris demonstrated consistency in her concern for the suffering of Palestinian people. Beauchamp ends his article “no one should be confident that Harris would govern perfectly on Israel-Palestine or any other foreign policy issue. But a speech that good at least earned her the benefit of the doubt.”⁹⁴ Harris and the Democrats have failed to relay any meaningful answer on how they are pressuring Israel to adhere to U.S. and international law. As Peter Beinart writes in the New York Times, to change U.S.-Israeli policy all Harris needs to do is “simply say that she’ll enforce the law,” and apply the Leahy law to Israel.⁹⁵ Unlike what Beauchamp portrays, voters against Harris for her stance on Israel and Palestine is not because of she and Biden’s failure to “govern perfectly”, but instead because they have enabled genocide every chance they had.
Even if we were to ignore the moral imperative to stop supporting Israel, it is an unpopular policy and damaging to Harris’ campaign in swing states. Polling has been fairly consistent in illustrating the American public’s aversion to sending arms to Israel: A CBS poll in October 2023 found 52% of Americans to be unsupportive of sending U.S. weapons to Israel. In April, that portion jumped to 60% of Americans and in June, 61% of Americans called for a cessation of weapon transfers. The Harris campaign’s stance is widely off base, with 77% of Democrats supportive of ending weapon transfers or atleast conditioning aid.⁹⁶ Zogby observes that for the Arab-American community, watching the horror of the U.S.-Israeli genocide unfold on the citizens of Palestine and Lebanon has had a profound effect on voting patterns. The poll, sponsored by the Arab American Institute, found that 81% of Arab Americans view Gaza as important in determining their vote.⁹⁷ As noted by the poll, Arab Americans are a politically active population and are rightfully angry at the current Democrat administration. Alabas Farhat, a Michigan state representative whose district includes part of the Arab-majority city of Dearborn, says that “The time for listening — we’re beyond that now… constituencies like mine are demanding action in the form of policy change, not just rhetoric change.”⁹⁸ The frustration toward Democrats have led some to take drastic measures, e.g. Hamtramck, MI, mayor Amer Ghalib endorsed Donald Trump this weekend, citing anger at Biden’s support for Israel and faith that Trump will bring peace.⁹⁹ The Arab American Institute poll provides evidence that either candidate can earn a sizable share by committing to ending weapon transfers to Israel, increasing humanitarian aid to Palestine, or calling for an immediate ceasefire; Harris can increase her share of votes from 41% to 60%, Trump from 42% to 55%.¹⁰⁰ Continuing to arm Israel despite the widespread disapproval from the Democratic base is sure to alienate voters in swing states, where both Harris and Trump are virtually tied. At the very least, the Democrats’ support for Israel will have long-lasting negative effects on the public’s perception of the Party and may give rise to opportunities for non-electoral organization.

Conclusions

The present situation appears to us as a choice of Kamala Harris, representing the worst of the Clintonesque neoliberal hawks in the Democratic Party, and Donald Trump, the fascistic freak of the Republican Party. There is, of course, the third option, which is a rejection of the two.
Angela Davis in September 2024, while speaking at La Fête de l’Humanité, encouraged Americans to vote against Trump and to “enlarge the terrain of mass struggle, to guarantee a space for the trade union movement to win victories, for the women’s movement to win victories, for people of color to win victories, for working and poor people to win victories”.¹⁰¹ For Davis, Harris represents an environment in which activists can struggle and force concessions because there is an underlying sympathy/resonance between the marginalized and the working class and with the Democrats, as opposed to the Trumpist Republicans who are only concerned with extinguishing democracy and imposing a fascist regime on their non-supporters. I do not find Davis’ arguments convincing for a few reasons. First, Harris is an enemy following Davis’ logic: “We have to challenge capitalism; it is the enemy of all progressive movements and struggles in the world.”¹⁰² Make no mistake, Harris intends not only to not challenge capitalism and its odious erosion of progressive movements, but intends to strengthen capitalist entrenchment in the United States and the world as a plantation. The task of communists, which Davis claims she is, is to wage class war, to stand on the side of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, and organize popular communist resistance and agitate. Davis concedes that the job is not done after Harris is elected, yet it is clear that Davis is discussing organizing movements within the environment of the Democratic Party. As leftists have seen time and time again, especially every election since 2000, the Democrats have consistently failed to mount any resistance toward Republican’s proto-fascism and have consistently backed the bourgeoisie. Davis supported Obama in 2008 and in 2012, and while she did criticize some of his actions, she continues to extol the progressive organizing (within the Democratic Party) that supported Obama.¹⁰³ Earlier in October of 2023, she claimed that Israel’s genocide on the Palestinian people is a “moral litmus test” for the world.¹⁰⁴ Just as countries across the world have failed, the Democrats including Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, have failed. In endorsing progressives to vote for Harris, Davis herself has failed.
David Frum, the shameless invertebrate of the Bush era, shares a similar view to Angela Davis in this regard. In a piece for the Atlantic, he writes that the pro-Palestinian protestors are “driven by moral outrage or ideological passion. But for those who are thinking strategically, the answer is obvious: Yes, they want to elect Trump.” He continues, “If you oppose American global hegemony, Trump is your candidate … If you wish America ill, of course you wish Trump well.” And finally, “The protesters want chaos and even violence in order to defeat Harris and elect Trump. They are not ill-informed or excessively idealistic or sadly misled. They are not overzealous allies. They are purposeful adversaries.”¹⁰⁵
To put Frum’s analysis in a different way: If you support American global hegemony, Harris is your candidate. If you wish America well, Harris is your candidate. Davis is essentially selling us the same story only wrapped in a veil of progressive language. I reject both of these views and instead put forth a very simple proposition. Even ignoring the fact that my politics necessitates militant organization external to electoralism, I still believe that leftists should not retreat from electoral politics during election times. Leftists should not dedicate any time, money, or energy helping further bourgeois Parties and instead work on developing an alternative workers Party. By contesting local elections with a third party, leftists can begin to seize state power to implement progressive reforms and deny nefarious actors power to enact harmful legislation. Leftists will need to contribute their time, money, and energy into building a national party capable of taking on the Democrats and Republicans at the local, state, and federal level. This is not advocating for a communist revolution through elections, but about developing an environment for “those of us who are more radical than Kamala Harris to put anti-capitalist and anti-racist programs forward.”
Why do we look away from Gaza? Bernard Lyon answers “because we’d see an unthinkable horizon”.¹⁰⁶ The genocide in Gaza is a glimpse into a future where capitalism is not defeated and there is no coherent resistance to imperialism and colonialism. The reaction of the United States has been of apathy at the very best. Americans look away because there is no structure that forces them to reckon with the fact that this is the future, and without building a leftist movement in the United States, Americans will never look and never speak out. Ilan Pappe, unfortunately prophetic, writes in 2006 “When Israel was absolved from any responsibility or accountability for the ethnic cleansing in 1948, it turned this policy into a legitimate tool for its national security agenda. If the present escalation and adaptation of genocidal policies would be tolerated by the world, it would expand and used even more drastically.”¹⁰⁷
This article has taken far too long to write. This topic deserves no more of my time or energy. The final point is that at some point you need to take a stand. This election it is twofold: first, both Trump and Harris are supportive of continuing the genocide,which immediately disqualifies them from receiving my vote, and second, building an alternative to the two party system requires consistent pressure on mobilizing votes even during presidential elections.
I leave you with some quotes:

“The last debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump comes to confirm once again that there is no difference between the Republican and Democratic parties regarding the Arab-zionist conflict and supporting the occupation and the genocide war against our Palestinian people. The two parties rushed to defend the “right of the zionist entity to defend itself”, and competed to show which of them is more loyal to this entity…What came in the debate between the candidates of the two American parties confirms that America remains America; the head of evil in the world and the sponsor of zionist terrorism, and there will be no change in the positions of the two parties unless the American public realizes that it is paying the price for the two parties’ gambling with their future and privileges, and their squandering of tax money in favor of the zionist entity and their surrender to the will of the zionist lobby.”¹⁰⁸


“Elections and political parties have no significance when all serious contenders for public office are fascist and the electorate is thoroughly misled about the true nature of the candidates. One cannot say all the people who vote are unaware, just as one cannot say the twelve hundred professors who backed Mussolini were all frightened. Those who are aware and still do nothing constructive are among the most pathetic victims of the totalitarian process.”¹⁰⁹

---

References

¹ “99 Killed in Gaza during Past 24 Hours: Palestinian Ministry of Health.” 2024. http://www.wam.ae. October 3, 2024. https://www.wam.ae/en/article/b5hwu43-killed-gaza-during-past-hours-palestinian-ministry.
² Huynh, Benjamin Q, Elizabeth T Chin, and Paul B Spiegel. 2023. “No Evidence of Inflated Mortality Reporting from the Gaza Ministry of Health.” The Lancet 403 (10421). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)02713-7.
³ Khatib, Rasha, Martin McKee, and Salim Yusuf. 2024. “Counting the Dead in Gaza: Difficult but Essential.” The Lancet 404 (10449). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(24)01169-3.
⁴ Binnur Donmez, Beyza. 2024. “WHO Says Over 6% of Gaza Population Killed or Injured in 1 Year.” Aa.com.tr. Anadolu Ajansı. October 4, 2024. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/who-says-over-6-of-gaza-population-killed-or-injured-in-1-year/3351703.
⁵ Soliman, Ashraf, Vincenzo De Sanctis, Nada Alaaraj, Shayma Ahmed, Fawziya Alyafei, Noor Hamed, and Nada Soliman. 2021. “Early and Long-Term Consequences of Nutritional Stunting: From Childhood to Adulthood.” Acta Bio Medica : Atenei Parmensis 92 (1). https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v92i1.11346.
⁶ Tress, Luke. 2016. “For Many Holocaust Survivors, Effects of Wartime Starvation Still a Plague.” Timesofisrael.com. May 3, 2016. https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-many-holocaust-survivors-wartime-starvation-still-a-daily-torment/.
⁷ Human Rights Watch. 2024. “Gaza: Israel’s Imposed Starvation Deadly for Children | Human Rights Watch.” Human Rights Watch. April 9, 2024. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/09/gaza-israels-imposed-starvation-deadly-children.
⁸ Cursino, Malu. 2024. “Israeli Protesters Attack Gaza Aid Trucks in West Bank.” http://Www.bbc.com. May 14, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg300jek94zo.
⁹ MEE Staff. 2024. “Rocks, Looting, Protests: How Israelis Are Blocking Gaza-Bound Aid Trucks.” Middle East Eye. May 10, 2024. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/rocks-looting-protests-far-right-israelis-block-aid-trucks-gaza.
¹⁰ Marie, Mohammad, Sana SaadAdeen, and Maher Battat. 2020. “Anxiety Disorders and PTSD in Palestine: A Literature Review.” BMC Psychiatry 20 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02911-7.
¹¹ El-Khodary, Basel, Muthanna Samara, and Chris Askew. 2020. “Traumatic Events and PTSD among Palestinian Children and Adolescents: The Effect of Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors.” Frontiers in Psychiatry 11 (4). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00004.
¹² Mousa, Ola. 2020. “Suicides Spike as Gaza’s Youth Driven to Despair.” The Electronic Intifada. July 31, 2020. https://electronicintifada.net/content/suicides-spike-gazas-youth-driven-despair/30821?utm_source=EI+readers&utm_campaign=f742cd3eaf-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e802a7602d-f742cd3eaf-299180337.
¹³ “After 15 Years of Blockade, Four out of Five Children in Gaza Say They Are Living with Depression, Grief and Fear.” 2022. Save the Children International. June 15, 2022. https://www.savethechildren.net/news/after-15-years-blockade-four-out-five-children-gaza-say-they-are-living-depression-grief-and.
¹⁴ United Nations Human Rights Council. 2009. “Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.” United Nations. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-190202/. Page 268.
¹⁵ Qouta, Samir, Raija-Leena Punamäki, and Eyad El Sarraj. 2003. “Prevalence and Determinants of PTSD among Palestinian Children Exposed to Military Violence.” European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 12 (6): 265–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-003-0328-0.
¹⁶ Chretien, Todd. 2004. “Believing in a Green Resistance.” CounterPunch.org. July 26, 2004. https://www.counterpunch.org/2004/07/26/believing-in-a-green-resistance/.
¹⁷ Ibid.
¹⁸ Ibid.
¹⁹ Chretien, Todd. 2008. “Why I’m Not Voting for Obama.” CounterPunch.org. October 23, 2008. https://www.counterpunch.org/2008/10/23/why-i-m-not-voting-for-obama/.
²⁰ Giroux, Henry. 2012. “Authoritarian Politics in the Age of Casino Capitalism.” CounterPunch.org. August 27, 2012. https://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/27/authoritarian-politics-in-the-age-of-casino-capitalism/.
²¹ Ibid.
²² Giroux, Henry. 2014. “Killing Machines and the Madness of Militarism: From Gaza to Afghanistan.” Truthout. July 24, 2014. https://truthout.org/articles/killing-machines-and-the-madness-of-militarism-from-gaza-to-afghanistan/.
²³ “DNC Releases New Ad Calling out Jill Stein as a Spoiler for Trump.” 2024. Democrats. October 11, 2024. https://democrats.org/news/dnc-releases-new-ad-calling-out-jill-stein-as-a-spoiler-for-trump/.
²⁴ Scherer, Michael. 2024. “Democrats Attack Green Party’s Jill Stein amid Spoiler Fears.” The Washington Post. October 11, 2024. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/11/jill-stein-kamala-harris-spoiler/.
²⁵ Brownstein, Ronald. 2016. “Millennial Voters May Cost Hillary Clinton the Election.” The Atlantic. September 19, 2016. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/hillary-clinton-millennials-philadelphia/500540/.
²⁶ Atwood, Kylie. 2016. “Will Low Enthusiasm among Black Voters Cost Clinton in Florida?” CBS News. September 26, 2016. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/will-low-enthusiasm-among-black-voters-cost-clinton-in-florida/.
²⁷ Small, Jay Newton. 2016. “Why So Many Women Abandoned Hillary Clinton.” Time. November 10, 2016. https://time.com/4566748/hillary-clinton-firewall-women/.
²⁸ Waddell, Kaveh. 2016. “Why Some People Think a Typo Cost Clinton the Election.” The Atlantic. December 13, 2016. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/12/why-some-people-think-a-typo-cost-clinton-the-election/510572/.
²⁹ Osborne, Samuel. 2016. “Comey FBI Letter ‘Almost Certainly’ Cost Hillary Clinton the Election, Numbers Reveal.” The Independent. December 12, 2016. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/hillary-clinton-james-comey-fbi-letter-cost-election-a7468831.html.
³⁰ Swanson, Ana. 2016. “How China May Have Cost Clinton the Election.” Washington Post, December 1, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/01/how-china-may-have-cost-clinton-the-election/.
³¹ Catanese, David. 2016. “DNC Staff: Arrogance Cost Clinton the Election.” US News & World Report. November 11, 2016. https://www.usnews.com/news/the-run-2016/articles/2016-11-11/dnc-staff-arrogance-cost-hillary-clinton-the-election-vs-donald-trump.
³² Enten, Harry. 2016. “How Much Did WikiLeaks Hurt Hillary Clinton?” FiveThirtyEight. December 23, 2016. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wikileaks-hillary-clinton/.
³³ Troy, Gil. 2016. “And the 2016 Ralph Nader Award Goes To… Bernie Sanders.” TIME. November 14, 2016. https://time.com/4569766/bernie-sanders-ralph-nader-2016/.
³⁴ Rozsa, Matthew. 2016. “Jill Stein Spoiled the 2016 Election for Hillary Clinton.” Salon. December 2, 2016. https://www.salon.com/2016/12/02/jill-stein-spoiled-the-2016-election-for-hillary-clinton/.
³⁵ Brodin, Mark S. 2012. “Bush v. Gore: The Worst (or at Least Second-To-The-Worst) Supreme Court Decision Ever.” Nevada Law Journal 12 (3): 563–70. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/nlj/vol12/iss3/8/.
³⁶ Mitchell, Alison. 2001. “Over Some Objections, Congress Certifies Electoral Vote.” The New York Times, January 7, 2001, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/07/us/over-some-objections-congress-certifies-electoral-vote.html.
³⁷ Fisher, Anthony. 2016. “No, Ralph Nader Did Not Hand the 2000 Presidential Election to George W. Bush.” Reason.com. August 3, 2016. https://reason.com/2016/08/03/ralph-nader-did-not-hand-2000-election/.
³⁸ Martin, George. 2016. “A Contested Legacy: Ralph Nader’s Challenge to the Two-Party System.” Socialist Alternative. November 3, 2016. https://www.socialistalternative.org/2016/11/03/contested-legacy-ralph-naders-challenge-two-party-system/.
³⁹ Roberts, Joel. 2004. “Nader to Crash Dems’ Party?” CBS News. July 27, 2004. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nader-to-crash-dems-party/.
⁴⁰ The Editors. 2004. “An Open Letter to Ralph Nader.” The Nation. January 29, 2004. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/open-letter-ralph-nader/.
⁴¹ Nader, Ralph, and The Editors. 2004. “Ralph Nader Replies: Whither the Nation?” The Nation. February 19, 2004. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/ralph-nader-replies-whither-nation/.
⁴² Weisberg, Jacob. 2000. “Ralph the Leninist.” Slate. October 31, 2000. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2000/11/ralph-the-leninist.html.
⁴³ Zuesse, Eric. 2013. “Ralph Nader Was Indispensable to the Republican Party.” HuffPost. November 11, 2013. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.
⁴⁴ Goldenberg, Suzanne. 2004. “Republicans Fund Nader as Decisive Electoral Weapon.” The Guardian. August 10, 2004. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/aug/10/uselections2004.usa.
⁴⁵ Troy, Gil. 2016. “And the 2016 Ralph Nader Award Goes To… Bernie Sanders.” TIME. November 14, 2016. https://time.com/4569766/bernie-sanders-ralph-nader-2016/.
⁴⁶ Scher, Bill. 2016. “How Bernie Could Cost Hillary the Election.” POLITICO. May 17, 2016. https://www.politico.eu/article/how-bernie-could-cost-hillary-the-election/.
⁴⁷ Chozick, Amy, Patrick Healy, and Yamiche Alcindor. 2016. “Bernie Sanders Endorses Hillary Clinton, Hoping to Unify Democrats.” The New York Times. July 12, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html.
⁴⁸ Dixon, Bruce A. 2015. “Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders: Sheepdogging for Hillary and the Democrats in 2016.” Black Agenda Report. May 7, 2015. https://www.blackagendareport.com/bernie-sanders-sheepdog-4-hillary.
⁴⁹ Baraka, Ajamu. 2015. “Why Is Cornel West Sheep-Dogging for the Democrats Again?” Dissident Voice. September 9, 2015. https://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/why-is-cornel-west-sheep-dogging-for-the-democrats-again/.
⁵⁰ Cornel West. 2016. Why I Endorse Green Party’s Jill Stein Over “Neoliberal Disaster” Hillary Clinton Interview by Amy Goodman. Democracy Now. https://www.democracynow.org/2016/7/18/why_a_member_of_the_democratic.
⁵¹ Jenkins, Colin. 2023. “Cornel West, the Pitfalls of Bourgeois Politics, and Forging a New Future among the Rubble.” Hampton Institute. June 10, 2023. https://www.hamptonthink.org/read/cornel-west-the-pitfalls-of-bourgeois-politics-and-forging-a-new-future-among-the-rubble.
⁵² “STATEMENT: GOP Operatives Prop up Jill Stein and Cornel West as Spoilers.” 2024. Democrats. September 4, 2024. https://democrats.org/news/statement-gop-operatives-prop-up-jill-stein-and-cornel-west-as-spoilers/.
⁵³ Bilmes, Linda J., William D. Hartung, and Stephen Semler. 2024. “United States Spending on Israel’s Military Operations and Related U.S. Operations in the Region, October 7, 2023 – September 30, 2024.” Providence, RI: Brown University. Page 4.
⁵⁴ Hudson, John. 2024. “U.S. Floods Arms into Israel despite Mounting Alarm over War’s Conduct.” Washington Post, March 6, 2024. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/06/us-weapons-israel-gaza/.
⁵⁵ Birnbaum, Michael. 2023. “State Dept. Official Resigns, Citing Objection to Israel Arms Transfers.” Washington Post, October 19, 2023. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/10/18/state-department-josh-paul-resignation-israel/.
⁵⁶ Singh, Kanishka, and Mike Stone. 2024. “US Approves Sale to Israel of $20 Billion Weapons Package.” Reuters. August 13, 2024. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/blinken-approves-sale-israel-military-equipment-worth-over-20-bln-2024-08-13/.
⁵⁷ Arria, Michael. 2024. “For the First Time Ever There Will Be a Vote in Congress on Blocking Weapons to Israel.” Mondoweiss. October 2, 2024. https://mondoweiss.net/2024/10/for-the-first-time-ever-there-will-be-a-vote-in-congress-on-blocking-weapons-to-israel/.
⁵⁸ Kessler, Glenn. 2024. “Eighty Percent of Ukraine-Israel Bill Will Be Spent in U.S. Or by U.S. Military.” Washington Post, April 27, 2024. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/25/eighty-percent-ukraine-israel-bill-will-be-spent-us-or-by-us-military/.
⁵⁹ Ruebner, Josh, Salih Booker, and Zaha Hassan. 2021. “Bringing Assistance to Israel in Line with Rights and U.S. Laws.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. May 12, 2021. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2021/05/bringing-assistance-to-israel-in-line-with-rights-and-us-laws?lang=en.
⁶⁰ Kirchgaessner, Stephanie. 2024. “‘Different Rules’: Special Policies Keep US Supplying Weapons to Israel despite Alleged Abuses.” The Guardian. January 18, 2024. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/us-supply-weapons-israel-alleged-abuses-human-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw.
⁶¹ Murphy, Brett. 2024. “Blinken Says Israeli Units Accused of Serious Violations Have Done Enough to Avoid Sanctions. Experts and Insiders Disagree.” ProPublica. May 8, 2024. https://www.propublica.org/article/blinken-israel-military-aid-human-rights-violations-leahy-law.
⁶² Gazis, Olivia, Matthew Mosk, and Margaret Brennan. 2024. “State Department Weighing ‘New Information’ from Israel in Determining Whether IDF Unit Violated U.S. Law.” CBS News. April 26, 2024. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/blinken-israel-mike-johnson-leahy-act/.
⁶³ Ruebner, Josh, Salih Booker, and Zaha Hassan. 2021. “Bringing Assistance to Israel in Line with Rights and U.S. Laws.” 2021.
⁶⁴ Klippenstein, Ken. 2023. “Joe Biden Moves to Lift Nearly Every Restriction on Israel’s Access to U.S. Weapons Stockpile.” The Intercept. November 25, 2023. https://theintercept.com/2023/11/25/biden-israel-weapons-stockpile-arms-gaza/.
⁶⁵ Abou-Elias, Janet. 2024. “Who’s Minding the Stockpile of US Weapons Going to Israel?” Responsible Statecraft. June 6, 2024. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-aid-to-israel-2668464807/.
⁶⁶ Klippenstein, Ken. 2023b. “Pentagon Taps ‘Tiger Team’ to Rush Weapons to Israel.” The Intercept. December 14, 2023. https://theintercept.com/2023/12/14/israel-weapons-sales-us-military/.
⁶⁷ Wrobel, Sharon . 2024a. “Bucking Boycotts, Israel Bonds Sells Record $3b since Start of Hamas War.” The Times of Israel. April 17, 2024. https://www.timesofisrael.com/bucking-boycotts-israel-bonds-sells-record-3b-since-start-of-hamas-war/.
⁶⁸ Wrobel, Sharon. 2024b. “Moody’s Lowers Israel’s Credit Rating for 2nd Time This Year, amid Hezbollah Escalation.” The Times of Israel. September 28, 2024. https://www.timesofisrael.com/moodys-slashes-israels-credit-rating-amid-hezbollah-escalation-war-costs-to-economy/.
⁶⁹ Woodman, Spencer, and Joanna Robin. 2024. “Inside the Sophisticated Sales Operation Funneling Billions from US State and Local Governments to Israel.” International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. July 25, 2024. https://www.icij.org/news/2024/07/inside-the-sophisticated-sales-operation-funneling-billions-from-us-state-and-local-governments-to-israel/.
⁷⁰ Israel Bonds. 2023. “State Treasurers, Other Elected Officials Join Israel Bonds Leadership Group – JNS.org.” Jewish News Syndicate. December 20, 2023. https://www.jns.org/wire/state-treasurers-other-elected-officials-join-israel-bonds-leadership-group/.
⁷¹ Hasson, Avi. 2024. “Israel’s Tech Sector and Investor Confidence amid War.” Wilson Center. October 23, 2024. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/israels-tech-sector-and-investor-confidence-amid-war.
⁷² Filut, Adrian. 2024. “Economic Concerns Mount as Israel Faces Drop in Foreign Investments and Services Export.” Ctech. March 18, 2024. https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/ldor8dzx5.
⁷³ Elia-Shalev, Asaf. 2024. “Donations to Israel since Oct. 7 Top $1.4 Billion, Israeli Government Report Concludes.” The Forward. April 8, 2024. https://forward.com/fast-forward/600742/donations-to-israel-since-oct-7-top-1-4-billion-israeli-government-report-concludes/.
⁷⁴ Kozul-Wright, Alexander. 2024. “Gaza War Extends Toll on Israel’s Economy.” Al Jazeera. August 23, 2024. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2024/8/23/gaza-war-extends-toll-on-israels-economy.
⁷⁵ Bunch, Will. 2024. “Chicago’s DNC: A Pulsating Rave Where the Ecstasy Is a Vision of MAGA-Free America.” The Philadelphia Inquirer. August 21, 2024. https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/chicago-dnc-democrat-vibe-ecstasy-20240821.html.
⁷⁶ Elliott, Philip. 2024. “Why This DNC Is Different: A New Generation Is Steering, Finally.” TIME. August 20, 2024. https://time.com/7012501/dnc-aoc-speech-biden-age/.
⁷⁷ Fisher, Max. 2016. “Here Is Clinton and Sanders’s Remarkable Exchange on Israel-Palestine — and Why It Matters.” Vox. April 15, 2016. https://www.vox.com/2016/4/15/11437602/clinton-sanders-israel-palestine-debate.
⁷⁸ Hatuqa, Dalia. 2016. “Raising the Palestinian Cause at the DNC.” Al Jazeera. July 28, 2016. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2016/7/28/raising-the-palestinian-cause-at-the-dnc.
⁷⁹ West, Cornel. 2016. Why I Endorse Green Party’s Jill Stein Over “Neoliberal Disaster” Hillary Clinton
⁸⁰ Fisher, Anthony. 2016a. “Many Bernie Sanders Delegates Protest DNC Platform’s Lack of Support for Palestinians.” Reason. July 26, 2016. https://reason.com/2016/07/26/bernie-sanders-delegates-for-palestinian/.
⁸¹ Pappe, Ilan. 2014. “Israel’s Incremental Genocide in the Gaza Ghetto.” The Electronic Intifada. July 13, 2014. https://electronicintifada.net/content/israels-incremental-genocide-gaza-ghetto/13562.
⁸² West, Cornel. 2024. Cornel West on Kamala Harris: Symbolic change, Same “Democratic Plantation” Interview by TRT World. TRT World. https://www.trtworld.com/content/article/cornel-west-on-kamala-harris-symbolic-change-same-democratic-plantation-18192127.
⁸³Zogby, James J. 2024. “Palestine Won at the Democratic Convention .” Arab American Institute. August 26, 2024. https://www.aaiusa.org/library/palestine-won-at-the-democratic-convention.
⁸⁴ Ahmad, Nadia B., Liano Sharon, and Esam Boraey. 2024. “Standing for Justice: Why We Raised a ‘Stop Arming Israel’ Banner on Day 1 of the DNC Convention.” Mondoweiss. August 30, 2024. https://mondoweiss.net/2024/08/standing-for-justice-why-we-raised-a-stop-arming-israel-banner-on-day-1-of-the-dnc-convention/.
⁸⁵ Ahmad, Nadia B. (@NadiaBAhmad). 2024. “This is my formal complaint to @harrisonjaime @TheDemocrats”. Twitter, August 23, 2024, 9:03 p.m. https://x.com/NadiaBAhmad/status/1827149765047464409
⁸⁶ Barnea, Yuval. 2024. “Haim Saban Criticizes Biden’s Threat to Halt Weapons Shipments.” The Jerusalem Post. May 10, 2024. https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/article-800681.
⁸⁷ Saban, Haim. 2024. “My Answer Is Clear: Kamala Harris – Opinion.” The Jerusalem Post. October 9, 2024. https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-823958.
⁸⁸ BreakThrough News (@BTnewsroom). 2024. “DNC attendees cover their ears as the names of dead Palestinian children are read as they leave the convention”. Twitter, August 22, 2024, 12:40 a.m. https://x.com/BTnewsroom/status/1826479453414850813
⁸⁹ Aleem, Zeeshan. 2024. “What Kamala Harris’ Troubling Embrace of War Hawks Means.” MSNBC. October 25, 2024. https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/harris-michigan-election-israel-gaza-cheney-torres-rcna177004.
⁹⁰ Harris, Kamala. 2024. “Democratic Presidential Nominee Acceptance.” TV. Presented at the Democratic National Convention, August 22. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/23/us/politics/kamala-harris-speech-transcript.html?smid=url-share.
⁹¹ Solomon, Abba A. 2024. “Why Are Liberal Zionists Cheering as Harris Echoes Biden on Gaza?” CounterPunch. August 28, 2024. https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/08/28/why-are-liberal-zionists-cheering-as-harris-echoes-biden-on-gaza/.
⁹² The Democratic National Committee. 2024. “The Democratic Party Platform.” The American Presidency Project. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2024-democratic-party-platform.
⁹³ Beauchamp, Zack. 2024. “The Moment When Kamala Harris’s Speech Came Alive.” Vox. August 23, 2024. https://www.vox.com/politics/368462/kamala-harris-israel-palestine-gaza-dnc-speech.
⁹⁴ Ibid.
⁹⁵ Beinart, Peter. 2024. “Opinion | Harris Can Change Biden’s Policy on Israel Just by Upholding the Law.” The New York Times, August 18, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/18/opinion/biden-israel-policy-harris.html?smid=url-share.
⁹⁶ Valdez, Jonah. 2024. “Most Americans Want to Stop Arming Israel. Politicians Don’t Care.” The Intercept. September 10, 2024. https://theintercept.com/2024/09/10/polls-arms-embargo-israel-weapons-gaza/.
⁹⁷Zogby, James J. 2024b. “Gaza Is Shaping This Election for Arab American Voters.” Arab American Institute. September 30, 2024. https://www.aaiusa.org/library/gaza-is-shaping-the-election-for-arab-american-voters.
⁹⁸ Alsharif, Mirna. 2024. “Arab Americans in Dearborn, Michigan, Struggle with Feeling Unheard in the 2024 Election.” NBC News. October 26, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/dearborn-michigan-2024-election-israel-hamas-war-gaza-palestine-rcna169142.
⁹⁹ Streeter, Kurt. 2024. “A Muslim Mayor in Michigan Endorses Trump, Roiling a City of Immigrants.” The New York Times, October 26, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/us/hamtramck-michigan-ghalib-trump.html.
¹⁰⁰ Arab American Institute. 2024. “New Poll Finds Arab American Voters Evenly Divided in the 2024 Presidential Election.” Arab American Institute. October 2, 2024. https://www.aaiusa.org/library/press-release-new-poll-arab-american-voters-evenly-divided-in-race-for-white-house-f989m.
¹⁰¹ Atkins, C.J. 2024. “Angela Davis: Electing Harris Will Open Space for More Radical Struggles.” People’s World. September 17, 2024. https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/angela-davis-electing-harris-will-open-space-for-more-radical-struggles/.
¹⁰² Ibid.
¹⁰³ Kimberley, Margaret. 2024. “The Cautionary Tale of Angela Davis.” Black Agenda Report. September 25, 2024. https://www.blackagendareport.com/cautionary-tale-angela-davis.
¹⁰⁴ Davis, Angela. 2023. Angela Davis: “Palestine Is a Moral Litmus Test for the World” Interview by Marc Lamont Hill. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/program/upfront/2023/10/27/angela-davis-palestine-is-a-moral-litmus-test-for-the-world.
¹⁰⁵ Frum, David. 2024. “The Defeat-Harris, Get-Trump Politics of Protest.” The Atlantic. August 20, 2024. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/08/dnc-palestinian-gaza-protests/679524/.
¹⁰⁶ Lyon, Bernard. 2009. “Silence over Gaza.” Endnotes. January 2009. https://endnotes.org.uk/posts/bernard-lyon-alain-silence-over-gaza.
¹⁰⁷ Pappe, Ilan. 2006. “Genocide in Gaza.” The Electronic Intifada. September 2, 2006. https://electronicintifada.net/content/genocide-gaza/6397.
¹⁰⁸ Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. September 11, 2024.
¹⁰⁹ Jackson, George. 1990. Blood in My Eye. Baltimore: Black Classic Press. Page 173.