The Democratic Party’s long-awaited autopsy of its 2024 election defeat has revealed something more disturbing than strategic incompetence. It has revealed moral cowardice.
In nearly 200 pages dissecting why Kamala Harris lost to Donald Trump, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) somehow failed to mention Gaza even once. Not once. No “Gaza.” No “Palestine.” No “Israel.” No “Arab American.” No “Muslim.” The single most divisive foreign policy issue of the election cycle, the issue that fractured the Democratic coalition, ignited campus protests, alienated young voters and fueled a rebellion within the party base, was erased from the official narrative.
This was not an oversight. It was an act of political denial.
The omission becomes even more glaring because numerous reports, including from outlets across the political spectrum, have already documented what Democratic insiders privately knew: Gaza hurt Harris badly. Axios reported that top Democratic officials working on the still-secret internal report concluded that the Biden administration’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza cost Harris significant support. One policymaker told The Intercept that “the data clearly showed that Gaza had hurt [Joe] Biden and Harris.”
Even progressive Democratic leaders were stunned by the omission. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, of New York, called it “pretty unbelievable” that Gaza was not mentioned once in the autopsy report, describing it as “a very major dynamic and a major threat that was happening in 2024.” Representative Ro Khanna, of California, bluntly stated that enabling “genocide in Gaza” cost Democrats the election.
When politicians, activists, journalists and even some pro-Israel Democrats are all asking how Gaza disappeared from the report, the answer becomes obvious: because acknowledging it would force the Democratic establishment to confront truths it still refuses to face.
The party leadership wants to discuss inflation, messaging failures and campaign mechanics. It does not want to discuss complicity.
That is because Gaza was not merely a foreign policy disagreement. For millions of Americans, especially younger voters, Muslims, Arabs, Black activists, progressives and many Jews, Gaza became a moral test. They watched as tens of thousands of Palestinians were killed, entire neighborhoods leveled, aid blocked, journalists targeted, universities crushed and children buried beneath rubble. They also watched the Biden administration continue supplying weapons, diplomatic cover and political protection to Israel while dismissing dissent as naive, dangerous or antisemitic.
Whether one uses the word genocide or not, the perception that the United States was enabling mass atrocities became politically and morally unavoidable. And younger Americans, unlike many older political operatives, were seeing the destruction in real time through social media rather than through sanitized official statements.
The Democratic establishment misread this generation completely.
For decades, party elites assumed progressive voters had nowhere else to go. They believed fear of Republican extremism would override outrage at Democratic hypocrisy. But many voters did not stay home because they suddenly loved Donald Trump. They stayed home because they stopped believing Democrats stood for anything beyond managing empire more politely.
The party’s refusal to even utter the word “Gaza” in its own postmortem demonstrates that it has learned almost nothing.
This omission matters not only politically but historically. Political autopsies are supposed to preserve institutional memory. They are supposed to identify mistakes so they are not repeated. Instead, this report functions more like an exercise in collective gaslighting. Millions of Americans watched Gaza dominate headlines, protests, dinner table arguments, campuses, social media feeds, city council meetings, labor unions and Democratic conventions. Yet the official Democratic narrative now pretends the issue barely existed.
It is reminiscent of how institutions throughout history have attempted to erase inconvenient moral failures while they are still unfolding.
What makes this particularly dangerous is that the Democratic Party is not simply refusing to acknowledge a strategic mistake. It is refusing to acknowledge a profound transformation within its own base. Younger Democrats are far more critical of Israeli government policies than previous generations. Many no longer accept the old binaries that equated criticism of Israel with antisemitism or support for Palestinian rights with extremism. The political ground has shifted beneath the party leadership, but many in Washington continue speaking as though it were still 1995.
That disconnect carries consequences.
The issue is not whether every voter agreed on the complexities of the conflict. Americans are capable of holding nuanced views. The issue is whether voters believed Democratic leaders were honest, principled and willing to place human rights above political calculation. Too many concluded they were not.
And when a political party cannot honestly diagnose why it lost, it is likely preparing to lose again.
The deeper tragedy is that the Democratic Party once prided itself on being the political home of anti-war activism, civil rights movements, student protest movements and international human rights advocacy. Today, many of the students protesting civilian deaths in Gaza are treated with more suspicion by Democratic leaders than the officials overseeing the destruction itself.
A party that cannot listen to its conscience eventually loses its soul.
The omission of Gaza from the DNC report will not make the issue disappear. It will only deepen the perception that Democratic leaders are unwilling to confront the political and moral consequences of their own policies.
If Democrats cannot honestly acknowledge how profoundly Gaza reshaped their coalition in 2024, they risk repeating the same mistake in 2028—while losing yet another generation of voters who no longer believe the party listens when human rights collide with political convenience.
Faisal Kutty is a professor of law at Southwestern Law School, affiliate faculty at the Rutgers Center for Security, Race and Rights, and a contributing editor for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.
Read the full article here
