Despite overheated rhetoric about America’s imminent descent into fascism, despite the frequent labeling of President Trump’s advisers and supporters as “Nazis,” and despite the anti-Trump left’s habit of calling itself the “resistance,” neo-Nazis and white supremacists are few and far between in the U.S. James Kirchick tries to make sense of the current hysteria:

[W]here do all these legions of Nazis and passionate brigades of anti-Nazis come from? . . . They are the products of a moral panic with an underlying political cause, which is now being exploited by a wide range of political operatives. . . . Fighting Nazis is a free and easy moral victory because there is almost no one on the other side. This suggests that [those who] advertise themselves . . . as brave and forthright fighters of Nazis are either immature or deploying lazy rhetoric to get their listeners to join in the unwitting pursuit of some other, presumably much less popular or acceptable, goal. . . .

The use of Nazis as a political strawman was long a propaganda technique of the Soviet Union, which casually slapped the label “fascist” on anyone or anything it didn’t like. (The tradition continues with today’s Kremlin propagandists, for whom “fascist” or “Nazi” is interchangeable with “critic of Russian foreign policy.”) In the American context, hyping the threat of Nazism is a proven fundraising tool. . . .

Besides the obvious dangers, and inherent foolishness, of such thinking, Kirchick notes that it can also have particularly deleterious consequences for Jews:

[W]hile anti-Jewish social prejudice, like saying the words “smelly kike,” for example, or refusing Jews admittance to your country club, has become a serious social crime—the sort of transgression that can destroy careers—actual anti-Semitism (“a cabal of rich Jews secretly manipulates and controls American foreign policy to benefit Israel,” “Israel is an illegitimate foreign colonial implant whose bloodthirsty leadership hates peace and delights in killing Palestinian children”) has become increasingly acceptable, even mainstream in some parts of the left.

Standing up to Nazism, as members of the Democratic Socialists of America valiantly did in Charlottesville, serves as a convenient fig leaf behind which to hide institutionalized organizational anti-Semitism, which the group giddily expressed just a week prior at their annual convention in Chicago, chanting “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will be Free,” after passing a motion in support of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel. . . .

Social prejudice may be annoying, depressing, and generally unpleasant, but it’s anti-Semitism that has proved to be physically dangerous—and very often lethal—to Jews.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.