Is Hamas Becoming a Global Identity Vehicle? Support for Hamas has morphed into a transnational phenomenon that is not just about being “pro-Palestine.” Instead, Hamas and what it represents have become a form of rebellious identity expression and a vessel for a sprawling mix of grievances: ideological, economic, cultural, and psychological. Its jihadist violence is being repackaged as a catch‑all outlet for anti‑Western, anti‑capitalist, anti‑white, and antisemitic politics. Whether it is leftism or Islamism, the “resistance” narrative that Hamas ostensibly represents has become quite a normalized interpretation of how to think about October 7 and the past two decades in Gaza, while erasing Palestinian agency, responsibility, and accountability. The inability to truly understand the complexities and actual details of the Israel and Palestine conflict is why so many support Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Iranian regime, all of whom are somehow seen as correcting or challenging white-centric dominance and colonialism. The third anniversary of October 7 exposed the scale of this shift. Large crowds in American and European cities used the worst day for Jews since the Holocaust and the most disastrous day in Palestinian history to flaunt their support for violent Islamist extremism. To understand the extent to which the “pro-Palestine” industrial complex has mutated and created out-of-control monsters, consider how incredibly damaging and self-sabotaging the pro-Hamas rallies and actions were. They deliberately chose to brand the Palestinian cause as inseparable from the bloodshed, hostage‑taking, and fascistic jihad of 10/7. These Western pro‑Hamas demonstrators are erasing any distinction between Palestinians and a terror organization that has devastated Palestinian society far more than it ever harmed Israelis. Their behavior naturally triggers an instinctive backlash: a hardening of attitudes, a dismissal of Palestinian suffering, and a collapse of sympathy for legitimate Palestinian grievances. Compounding the problem is the statistically confirmed fact that large segments of the Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian diaspora communities have been unable or unwilling to counter this trend. Some have joined it outright, embracing the “resistance” narrative or hiding behind slogans like “this didn’t begin on October 7” to avoid confrontation with the anti‑Zionist machinery that dominates the “pro‑Palestine” space and to not be called “Zionists” or “traitors” by other members of the community. With diaspora communities paralyzed, universities compromised, and basic civic norms eroded, national‑level responses are now essential. Support for Hamas remains strong three years after October 7 and is growing more entrenched. Think ahead five or ten years: persistent economic strain, deeper ideological radicalization, and expanding networks of Islamist and far‑left extremism. What happens when those marching for Hamas begin entering governments, militaries, financial institutions, and other levers of power? What happens when already‑radicalized youth, with no off‑ramps, continue believing the West, Jews, and Zionists are their mortal enemies? Even if a tiny fraction – less than one‑tenth of one percent – turn to violence, the resulting instability could eclipse that of ISIS and al-Qaeda combined. A coordinated national strategy is overdue – not to suppress legitimate debate on Israel and Palestine, but to draw firm boundaries and stop tolerating the intolerable. This video shows just a small sample of pro-Hamas rallies in major US and European cities two days ago, on October 7.

Mayor Mamdani devoted only 49 words of a 211-word statement to commemorate the worst single day attack on Jews since the Holocaust, in a city that is home to the largest Jewish population outside Israel. He avoided any real description of what happened on October 7, including mass murder, burnings, beheadings, executions, and sadism toward Jews, Arabs, and foreign workers, including women, children, teenagers, and the elderly. He refused to call Hamas a terrorist organization or acknowledge that none of this would have happened had the group honored the ceasefire it unilaterally broke. There was no assignment of agency or responsibility to any Palestinian actor. Yet he used the remaining 162 words to describe in detail what happened in Gaza after the attack. He showed full capacity to recognize Palestinian suffering, which is real and must be acknowledged, but his statement was tone deaf, inconsiderate, and antagonizing to millions who deserve their trauma recognized on its own terms. He has spoken endlessly about his anti-Israel views and will continue to do so, but this was the one day in which he could have offered unconditional compassion to the victims and survivors of October 7 and their loved ones, many of whom have deep roots in New York. This type of statement ignores basic logical principles like cause and effect, choices and consequences, actions and reactions, priorities and implications, further infantilizing the Palestinians and ignoring the failures of Hamas and Palestinian leadership that have harmed their own people. It hardens attitudes toward Gazans and reduces empathy for the vast and unspeakable suffering in the coastal enclave, rather than increasing it. @NYCMayor: sometimes less is better. You should have stayed with your first 49 words, especially as unhinged “pro-Palestine activists” are celebrating October 7 today across the country. Stand up to your base, Mr. Mamdani. You have already won and do not need to appease radicals at the expense of Jewish New Yorkers. And please stop pretending that this is about helping Palestinians or caring for Gazans.