Demands for censorship and accusations of antisemitism have backfired

Support for Israel is far higher among Republicans than Democrats. For example, a recent Gallup poll shows that 71% of Republicans approve of Israel’s military action in Gaza compared to just 8% of Democrats.

And yet the number of prominent right-wing voices criticizing Israel is increasing. Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene, who are all highly influential among President Donald Trump’s MAGA base, have called into question U.S. support for Israel. Even Michael Knowles of the Daily Wire, which is led by the strongly pro-Israel Ben Shapiro, said recently, “You’re losing me… A just war cannot just go on indefinitely.”

To be sure, the Trump administration remains steadfastly pro-Israel. Last week, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted a grant notice stating that it would deny $1.9 billion in disaster relief funding to states and cities that boycott Israel. And the administration has punished anti-Israel sentiment and alleged antisemitism at universities by freezing federal funds and cancelling student visas.

But there is little doubt that Republicans’ view of Israel is becoming less favorable, and it’s the oldest Republican voters who appear to be most supportive of Israel, while younger voters are moving in the opposite direction. In 2022, 63% of Republicans under 50 viewed Israel positively, but in April 2025 50% of Republicans under 50 held a negative view of Israel. “That’s a shocking change,” noted UnHerd’s Washington correspondent Emily Jashinsky last week, “especially as younger generations begin to comprise more of the electorate.”

Consider the response from young conservatives online to DHS’ requirement that states not boycott Israeli companies. Many on social media asked how cutting funding for things like search-and-rescue equipment and backup power systems on behalf of a foreign nation was consistent with “America First.”

In response to the backlash, DHS partially backed off its threat. “There is no FEMA requirement tied to Israel in any current NOFO,” or Notice of Funding, a DHS spokesperson told Public. “No states have lost funding, and no new conditions have been imposed. FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] grants remain governed by existing law and policy and not political litmus tests.”

Meanwhile, President Trump knows that his unconditional support for Israel is becoming increasingly unpopular. “My people are starting to hate Israel,” he reportedly told a major Jewish donor. “There are people in the White House who are watching this narrative develop in the right wing, in the MAGA world, that is very anti-Israel, very anti-Jewish,” explained a Mideast expert in the administration.

For decades, Israel held onto Americans’ support, and the so-called “Israel lobby” was able to deftly influence both politicians and public opinion. Since its founding in 1948 until very recently, Israel enjoyed backing from both Democrats and Republicans. Sympathy for Israel was everywhere from Hollywood and the news media to the State Department and even the universities.

That era is coming to an end despite the enormous efforts by pro-Israel groups and the White House. The degree of public skepticism toward Israel is unprecedented in its nearly 80-year existence as a nation.

The Times of Israel reported earlier this month that Israel’s Foreign Ministry recognizes the scale of the country’s image crisis, with one former spokesperson calling its current messaging failure “catastrophic.” And, as is apparent to anyone on social media, actual antisemitism — including explicit Holocaust denial and conspiracy theories about sinister Jewish cabals controlling world affairs — is now on the rise.

On the pro-Palestine Left, many claim that Israel’s reputation has suffered simply because of its own actions. Relentless photos and videos of the destruction of Gaza and the suffering of children are enough to explain Israel’s loss of moral legitimacy. The sheer brutality of Israel’s war, they say, is why so many of its former supporters find the country’s behavior indefensible.

The pro-Israel Right, in contrast, argues that uncontrollable antisemitism is at fault for Israel’s sinking popularity. Israel, they say, is fighting a just war, but is treated unfairly on the international stage because of double standards informed by ancient Jew hatred.

Neither of these claims alone, or combined, fully explains why the public is turning against Israel. In particular, neither the anti-Israel Left nor the pro-Israel Right can explain the sharp generational divide behind rising disapproval.

To really understand why Israel has lost public admiration and why genuine antisemitism appears to be increasing, we have to understand the broader transformation in the unifying political narratives that once dominated the Western world.

Nationalist Dissonance

After World War II, European and American intellectuals developed a specific cultural, political, and economic framework. Its goal was to ensure that the fascism and totalitarianism that led to the atrocities of the war, especially the Holocaust, would not reemerge. In his book Return of the Strong Gods, R.R. Reno calls this ideology the “open society consensus.”

The postwar consensus promoted an opening of society to ward off what Reno refers to as the “strong gods”: the deeply felt convictions and beliefs that animated Nazism and fascism. These included patriotism, nationalism, and shared cultural heritage, which all needed to be preemptively weakened to ensure that the horrors of WWII could never happen again. Religion, the family, and traditional norms would also become suspect due to the strong passions and loyalties they could inspire.

Another feature of the post-war ideological consensus was the idea that a Jewish state was necessary to prevent future massacres or genocides of Jews. Zionism predated the war, but the Holocaust was an impetus for global support, including from the United Nations.

For the first few decades after the war, the existence of Israel and the larger international project of the “open society” appeared to be compatible. Both aspects of the post-war consensus aimed to redress the horrors of WWII, to affirm principles of justice, and to ensure the protection of minorities.

But there was a critical tension. The effort to prevent fascism in Europe and the U.S. led to an emphasis on multiculturalism and demonization of Western civilization and values. Left-wing intellectuals led by Theodor Adorno usedthe open society consensus to pathologize conservatives through the concept of the “authoritarian personality.”

The “authoritarian personality” was prone to fascism because it favored order, had a strong identification with the in-group, and adhered to tradition. To safeguard democracy and human rights, governments and institutions needed to actively discourage and critique these traits, with the goal of changing individual psychology.