August 7, 2024 - 8:00pm

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is methodically reshaping the Democratic Party, picking off progressive candidates one by one. Its latest triumph is the unseating of Cori Bush, the firebrand congresswoman from Missouri’s 1st district. Bush, a former nurse and Black Lives Matter activist, fell to Wesley Bell, a county prosecutor who ran as a “pragmatic” progressive. The secret ingredient in Bell’s victory? Over $8 million in spending from AIPAC-affiliated super PACs — the second most expensive primary of all time.

This wasn’t AIPAC’s first rodeo. Just weeks earlier, they helped topple another member of the progressive “Squad,” Jamaal Bowman of New York. The price tag for that race was a cool $15 million. These astronomical sums are transforming once-sleepy House primaries in safe Democratic districts into high-stakes battlegrounds, with AIPAC as the heavyweight champion.

The pattern appears to be clear: speak out against Israel’s ongoing aggression in Gaza, and AIPAC will open its considerable war chest to fund your opponent. It’s a simple equation that’s yielding results. Bush and Bowman are just the latest casualties in a broader campaign to purge the Democratic Party and Left-aligned spaces like academia more generally of voices critical of Israel.

But AIPAC’s success wasn’t solely due to its financial muscle. Bush’s own ineffectiveness in Congress played a significant role in her downfall. During her tenure, she failed to pass a single piece of legislation, focusing instead on divisive rhetoric and symbolic gestures. Her obsession with the Gaza conflict seemed tone-deaf to many St. Louis residents grappling with more immediate concerns like crumbling infrastructure and economic hardship.

AIPAC and its allies shrewdly exploited this disconnect. Rather than focusing on the war in Gaza, their messaging highlighted Bush’s poor congressional record on bread-and-butter issues. Mailers and ads branded her as “INEFFECTIVE,” spotlighting missed votes and her opposition to key Biden administration initiatives. This strategy hit all the right notes, resonating with voters who felt neglected by their representative.

It bears restating how effective this strategy has become. AIPAC isn’t just influencing elections; they’re fundamentally altering the DNA of the Democratic Party. With each victory, they send a chilling message to other progressives: criticise Israel at your own peril — and if you must, choose your words carefully, as Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has.

The impact of these defeats ripples far beyond the individual races. Any Democrat in a contested primary will think twice before uttering a word of support for Palestinians or criticism of Israeli policy. The result? A party increasingly monolithic in its stance on Israel, even as polling shows that rank-and-file Democrats remain divided on the issue. More than this, some data suggests that grassroots Democrats are growing more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause — particularly Democrats under 35. But AIPAC’s strategy doesn’t rely on popular support. It’s about leveraging financial might to shape the choices available to voters.

Critics argue that AIPAC’s outsized influence threatens the democratic process, turning elections into auctions won by the highest bidder. They’re not wrong. Indeed, if AIPAC continues its winning streak, the future of progressive politics in the Democratic Party looks increasingly bleak. The congressional “Squad,” once hailed as the vanguard of a new Left-wing movement, could end up being systematically dismantled. Essentially it has gone from, in the words of one writer, a legislative unit to a “lefty group chat made public”.

That said, AIPAC’s reshaping of the Democratic Party may prove a Pyrrhic victory. By silencing critical voices and enforcing ideological conformity, they risk creating a party out of step with its own base, particularly if it depresses general election turnout.

For now, though, AIPAC’s influence shows no signs of waning. As long as money remains the lifeblood of American politics, groups with deep pockets will continue to win elections, particularly in easy-to-influence congressional primaries. The question is: can those sympathetic to the Palestinian cause adapt to this new reality — some have fended off AIPAC-funded challenges, after all — or will they become relics of a different era in Democratic politics? I’d put my own money on the latter, and more’s the pity for civic discourse.


Oliver Bateman is a historian and journalist based in Pittsburgh. He blogs, vlogs, and podcasts at his Substack, Oliver Bateman Does the Work

MoustacheClubUS