Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., has acknowledged this week that some individuals might literally mean the phrase ‘globalize the intifada,’ a term associated with calls for global resistance against Israel. The phrase, which has been widely criticized as a call for violence against Jewish people, has come under scrutiny as New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani faces pressure to condemn it. Carson’s comments come amid ongoing controversy surrounding the use of the phrase in political discourse and its implications in the context of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The American Jewish Committee has explained that the phrase ‘globalize the intifa’ calls for people from around the globe to participate in rising up against Israel. The Second Intifada, which took place in the early 2000s, was marked by Palestinian terrorism, including suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. Carson deflected on why Mamdani has been reluctant in fully condemning the phrase, acknowledging that some people might still be on the fence about its meaning.
During an interview with Fox News, Carson was asked about Mamdani’s reluctance to condemn the phrase. Carson responded that some people may mean it literally, while others have repurposed it as symbolic language. James Carville, a prominent Democratic strategist, has warned Mamdani to keep the phrase ‘out of his mouth’ in a recent Fox News segment. Other Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Ritchie Torres, have also criticized Mamdani for his failure to condemn the rhetoric, emphasizing the importance of clear and condemnatory language regarding such divisive terms.
Mamdani, who has won the Democratic mayoral nomination in a political upset, has faced increasing scrutiny for his refusal to condemn the phrase. During an interview with The Bulwark podcast, he initially declined to condemn the rhetoric, and he has yet to fully address the issue during public appearances. His avoidance of the topic has drawn criticism from both within and outside of his party, as political leaders and media outlets continue to pressure him to take a public stance on the issue. This has raised concerns about the potential use of the phrase as a rallying cry for violence and the need for political figures to engage with and address such rhetoric in a transparent and responsible manner.