I was scrolling through Twitter on Wednesday morning, coffee in hand, trying to make sense of the latest political hellscape, when I stumbled across the most 2025 clip imaginable: the chairman of the Democratic National Committee explaining why his party is totally cool with candidates who refuse to condemn phrases historically associated with murdering Jews.
Ken Martin, the DNC chair who apparently thinks political strategy means welcoming everyone except the people you're supposed to be protecting, went on PBS and delivered what might be the most politically suicidal sound bite in recent memory. When asked about NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani's refusal to condemn "globalize the intifada," Martin's response was chef's kiss perfect in its obliviousness.
"We are a big tent party," Martin said, with the kind of earnest conviction usually reserved for people explaining why their pyramid scheme is totally legitimate this time.
A big tent. For intifada
THE AUDACITY IS BREATHTAKING.
When the Tent Gets Too F*cking Big
Let's talk about this "big tent" for a minute. Martin explained that the Democratic Party welcomes "conservative Democrats, centrist Democrats, labor progressives like me, and this new brand of Democrat which is the leftists." He said this coalition building "leads to dissent and debate" but that such "differences of opinion" should be "celebrated."
Differences of opinion. About whether to condemn a slogan associated with suicide bombings and civilian massacres.
It's like having a "big tent" barbecue where some people want hamburgers, some want hot dogs, and some want to LITERALLY MURDER THE HOSTS. But hey, diversity of thought, right?
The beautiful part is Martin's framing of this whole thing as just another policy disagreement, like arguing about tax rates or infrastructure spending. "There's no candidate in this party that I agree 100% of the time with," he said, as if Mamdani's position was equivalent to supporting a different healthcare plan instead of, you know, refusing to condemn calls for violence against Jews.
The Trust Fund Socialist's Greatest Hits
Meanwhile, Zohran Mamdani continues his victory lap around New York City, fresh off his stunning primary upset over Andrew Cuomo. The 33 year old democratic socialist who grew up on the Upper West Side and raps under the name "Mr. Cardamom" has become the poster child for a new kind of progressive politics: one where growing up wealthy and privileged somehow qualifies you to speak for the oppressed masses.
When NBC's Kristen Welker gave Mamdani THREE separate opportunities to condemn "globalize the intifada," he deflected each time with the kind of word salad usually reserved for beauty pageant contestants. "That's not language that I use," he said, as if the question was about his personal vocabulary preferences rather than a phrase historically linked to terrorism.
But Mamdani didn't stop there. He went full Holocaust inversion, claiming the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum had used the word "intifada" to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. THE ABSOLUTE FCKING GALL.*
The museum responded with the kind of statement usually reserved for war crimes: "Exploiting the Museum and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to sanitize 'globalize the intifada' is outrageous and especially offensive to survivors. Since 1987 Jews have been attacked and murdered under its banner.
"
The Beautiful Timing
Here's what makes this whole sh*tshow particularly grotesque: this controversy is playing out just weeks after two Israeli Embassy staffers, Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, were gunned down outside a Jewish museum in Washington, D.C. The 26 and 30 year old couple was about to get engaged. Yaron had bought a ring and planned to propose in Jerusalem.
Instead, they were murdered by a man who shouted "Free Palestine" while firing multiple rounds at them as they tried to crawl away.
But sure, Ken, let's celebrate the "diversity of opinion" that includes people who won't condemn the slogan that inspired their killer.
THE MORAL BANKRUPTCY IS COMPLETE.
The Mapping Project Connection
What Martin either doesn't know or doesn't care about is the direct line between "globalize the intifada" rhetoric and actual violence. The pro-Palestinian group Within Our Lifetime, which has championed this slogan, literally published maps of Jewish organizations in New York City in November 2023, marking them as targets for "direct action."
The maps were headlined "Globalize the Intifada" and described Jewish institutions as having "blood on their hands." They urged followers to "KNOW YOUR ENEMY" and marked locations as "zones of operations."
This isn't abstract political rhetoric. It's targeted harassment designed to intimidate and endanger Jewish Americans. And Ken Martin thinks this deserves a place in his "big tent.
"The Heritage Foundation Reality Check
A recent Heritage Foundation analysis documented exactly what "globalize the intifada" means in practice: "Their goal is not to affect U.S. policy towards Israel or the Middle East but to destroy the United States through a political revolution that features a Palestinian inspired strategy of indiscriminate attacks against civilians."
The report notes that FBI raids on Palestinian American activists have uncovered "rifles, ammunition, and explosive devices" alongside evidence of planning attacks on Jewish targets. But apparently, this level of threat assessment is too sophisticated for the DNC chairman.
Martin's response to all this? CELEBRATE THE DIVERSITY.
The Holocaust Museum Smackdown
The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum doesn't usually wade into political controversies, but Mamdani's Holocaust inversion was apparently so offensive that they felt compelled to speak out. Their statement was devastatingly clear: comparing the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to "globalize the intifada" is "outrageous and especially offensive to survivors."
For context, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was Jews fighting against Nazi genocide. The intifadas were Palestinians targeting Jewish civilians with suicide bombs. ONE OF THESE THINGS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER.
But in Mamdani's world, and apparently in Martin's "big tent," these distinctions don't matter. It's all just "language subject to interpretation."
What's really happening here is a cold political calculation. Martin and the Democratic establishment have decided they can afford to lose Jewish voters in pursuit of progressive activists who view antisemitism as politically useful.
The math is simple: there are more young progressives than Jewish Democrats, and the progressives are louder, more energized, and more likely to primary moderate candidates. So the party has chosen its side.
Martin's "big tent" defense is just political cover for this abandonment. By framing antisemitic rhetoric as "diversity of opinion," he's creating space for views that would have been unthinkable in mainstream Democratic politics just a few years ago.
The Beautiful Hypocrisy
Here's what makes this particularly rich: the same Democratic Party that spent years claiming Trump was normalizing dangerous rhetoric is now literally normalizing calls for violence against Jews. The same people who insisted "words have consequences" when discussing January 6th are now celebrating "differences of opinion" about whether Jews deserve to live safely.
Martin's PBS interview came just days after the anniversary of the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust, and weeks after two young Jewish Americans were murdered in our nation's capital. His response was to double down on welcoming the rhetoric that inspired their killers.
THE TONE DEAFNESS IS STAGGERING.
The Inevitable Conclusion
Ken Martin's "big tent" isn't big enough to include Jews who want to live without fear of violence, but it's apparently spacious enough for people who refuse to condemn calls for that violence. This isn't coalition building; it's moral bankruptcy with a focus group-tested slogan.
The Democratic Party has made its choice. They've decided that Jewish safety is a price worth paying for progressive coalition building. Martin's PBS interview wasn't a mistake or a moment of poor judgment; it was the official unveiling of the party's new position.
When the chairman of a major political party can't bring himself to condemn antisemitic rhetoric in the wake of actual murders, we've crossed a line that American politics has maintained for decades. Martin's "big tent" isn't inclusive; it's exclusionary toward anyone who thinks Jews deserve basic safety and security.
The tent is big enough for everyone except the people being targeted for violence.
And Ken Martin thinks that's something worth celebrating.
WELCOME TO THE INTIFADA TENT.
The admission price is your moral compass, but don't worry, they've got plenty of room for everyone else.
Share this post