This spring, Andrew Pessin, a professor of philosophy at Connecticut College, was subjected to ferocious criticism and harassment—first by student groups, and then by the college’s faculty and administration—over a Facebook post in which he compared Hamas to “a rabid pit bull.” The episode culminated in Pessin’s taking a leave of absence. Richard Landes explains how an entire college campus surrendered to the mob:

The predictable tragedy of the whole affair was how, in the name of progressive goals, a revolutionary moment empowered some of the most anti-progressive forces on campus. The administration quickly appointed three interim “deans of institutional equity and inclusion” [in response to the uproar over Pessin], . . . who planned a series of events that, at least where Israel was concerned, systematically pumped hate propaganda into the campus community. . . .

One can make a case that the entire incident resembles an unalloyed, albeit small-scale, victory in the cognitive war being waged by Islamists against Western democracy. To most of those prominently involved, especially in postmodern [and] post-colonial guilds like race and gender studies, such a claim seems outlandish, even paranoid: in their minds the Pessin business had nothing to do with jihad or Islamism, but everything to do with human rights, dignity, and democracy. They may genuinely believe as much, however, and still be useful dupes in service to those with different priorities.

Anyone familiar with Islamist [tactics] would see the Pessin affair as a major success across the board. Consider: it served up extensive cooperation between the global jihadist right and the global progressive left, all in the name of a common revolutionary desire to transform the nascent global community and oppose U.S. imperialism. It bonded the [the two groups] over their shared view of Israel as the Antichrist, the apocalyptic enemy in the battle for world salvation. Destroy Israel for World Peace!

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.