Small Clues: Radical Currents

The Pro-Palestine Far Left and Its Radical Entanglements

Executive Summary

This report examines how interconnected leftist and pro-Palestinian activist networks contributed to the radicalisation and subsequent violent actions of Elias Rodriguez between 2017 and 2025. By analysing Rodriguez’s trajectory through various ideological communities—including the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), ANSWER Coalition, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), Palestine Action, Unity of Fields, and Progressive International—the report identifies the mechanisms by which decentralised networks facilitate ideological intensification and militant escalation.

Key findings indicate a clear progression from initial activist involvement and ideological adoption to strategic dormancy and private reinforcement, ultimately culminating in violent actions fuelled by network-driven narratives. The roles played by influential figures and groups, such as financier-activist James “Fergie” Chambers and the global coalition Progressive International, are critical in understanding the dynamics of radicalisation. The report underscores the significance of network interactions and ideological framing and highlights the potential for moderate advocacy to feed into more extreme militant actions.

How the Far-Left’s Palestine Solidarity Became Violent

Radicalisation within political activism frequently involves complex networks characterised by overlapping relationships, shared ideologies, and collective narratives. This report uses the case study of Elias Rodriguez, whose 2025 violent attack at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., represents an extreme endpoint of a radicalisation trajectory facilitated by interconnected far-left and pro-Palestinian activist groups.

Activist networks, including PSL, ANSWER, SJP, JVP, Palestine Action, Unity of Fields, and Progressive International, provided both ideological frameworks and operational support that guided Rodriguez from moderate protest participation to explicit violence. Understanding this trajectory involves examining not only Rodriguez’s actions but also the broader network context; how these groups communicated, reinforced ideological commitments, managed financial and organisational resources, and responded collectively to major geopolitical events, such as renewed conflicts in the Middle East.

By focussing explicitly on the network interactions, this analysis aims to reveal how decentralised activism environments can create pathways to militancy. It explores the implications for activist communities, policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and civil society organisations committed to preventing similar radicalisation and violent outcomes.

The Infrastructure of Influence: Groups, Figures, and Flows

Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL)

• Founded: 2004 – split from the Workers World Party, Marxist-Leninist, pro-resistance framing
• Notable fronts: ANSWER Coalition, People’s Forum, Codepink
• Role: Framed early anti-imperialism for Rodriguez. Disavowed him post-attack.

Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP)

• Founded: 1990s; re-radicalised in 2010s, linked to Hatem Bazian
• Ideology: “Ethical” anti-Zionism
• Role: Provided moral frameworks Rodriguez later echoed. Ran BDS and Deadly Exchange campaigns.

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)

• Founded: 2001, linked to WESPAC foundation, Hatem Bazian and AMP
• Ideology: Campus-based anti-colonialism
• Role: Framed Israel as a settler-colonial state. Provided Rodriguez’s rhetorical foundation.

Unity of Fields (formerly Palestine Action US)

• Founded: 2023 (as PA-US as a branch of Palestine Action UK), rebranded 2024
• Ideology: Militant anti-Zionism, third-worldist
• Role: Called Rodriguez’s act “legitimate resistance.” Shared slogans with his manifesto.

Progressive International (PI) and Jeremy Corbyn

• Founded: 2020 (Varoufakis, Sanders Institute)
• Ideology: Anti-imperialist internationalism
• Role: Promoted Palestine Action globally. Supported campaigns linking Israel to genocide.
• Jeremy Corbyn’s role: PI Council member; participated in PI-funded Gaza accountability summits. Actively involved in Hague Group convenings. Lobbied in Washington DC for the release of Assange
  

Phases of Radicalisation: 2017–2025

Phase I: Foundations and Affiliations (2017–2019)

Theme: Emergence of Networks and Early Participation

• Rodriguez’s involvement: Joins ANSWER/PSL in Chicago; protests Amazon HQ and Jerusalem embassy decision
• Wider context: Early cross-pollination between PSL, ANSWER, and Palestine solidarity protests.
• Key movements: Post-2017 anti-Trump protests; escalating PSL-ANSWER activism aligned with global events

Phase II: Radicalisation in Dormancy (2020–2022)

Theme: Ideological Entrenchment and Online Echo Chambers

• Rodriguez goes quiet publicly, but later chat logs show growing fixation with Syria, Hezbollah, Stalin, and “resistance axis” discourse
• Organisational shifts: Palestine Action launches in the UK (2020); begins high-profile anti-Elbit campaigns with symbolic tactics
• PI coalesces globally, bringing Corbyn, Varoufakis, and CODEPINK under one ideological umbrella

Phase III: International Convergence and Escalation (2023)

Theme: Militant Infrastructure Meets Global Legitimacy

• Rodriguez remains ideologically aligned with PI, PSL, and Palestine Action narratives but unaffiliated officially.
• Fergie Chambers funds Palestine Action US, openly praising Hamas’s Oct 7 attack and providing legal support for direct actionsInterconnections Among ….
• PI amplifies Palestine Action’s US branch, publishes “Shut Elbit Down” material and maps targeting Israeli-linked facilitiesProgressive Internation….
• Violent rhetoric like “bring the war home” becomes common in messaging across Unity of Fields, PI, and radical Twitter currents.

Phase IV: Unity of Fields and Domestic Insurrectionism (2024)

Theme: From Symbolic Protest to Tactical Nihilism

• Palestine Action US rebrands as Unity of Fields, doubling down on slogans like “death to Israel,” vandalism, and university sabotage
• Rodriguez displays increasing identification with this “resistance” ethos, placing JVP and Calla Walsh posters in his window and echoing their slogans.
• Unity of Fields declares: “Open up a new front here in the belly of the beast.” Rodriguez internalises this doctrine in his final manifesto.

Phase V: The Embassy Attack and Ideological Denial (May 2025)

Theme: Violence as Ideological Performance

• Rodriguez carries out shooting of two Israeli diplomats, wraps himself in a red keffiyeh and shouts “Free, free Palestine.”
• His manifesto directly mirrors Unity of Fields rhetoric, especially “escalate” and “bring the war home.”
• Reactions: PSL disavows him; PI remains silent on Unity of Fields. Some fringe figures launch “Free Elias” campaigns, showcasing a rift between tactical militancy and public-facing activism.

From Networks to Action: The Rodriguez Case as a Lived Expression
The preceding sections outlined the ideological frameworks, networks, and figures central to the post-2017 convergence of pro-Palestine and anti-imperialist activism. What follows is a deeper chronological and individual-level exploration centring on Elias Rodriguez as a case study in how these ideological currents, material supports, and activist ecosystems intersect in practice. Far from being a lone actor, Rodriguez moved through and absorbed the narratives, strategies, and slogans of this evolving network. His trajectory illustrates how a broader political environment can shape, and, in some cases, radicalise individuals and influence the course they take.

Phase I: Foundations and Affiliations (2017–2019)

PSL and the ANSWER Coalition: Marxist-Leninism Meets Campism

The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) emerged from a 2004 split in the old Workers World Party, carrying forward a staunch Marxist-Leninist, “campist” ideology. This meant PSL embraced a hardline anti-imperialism that reflexively supported regimes opposed to U.S. power – from Cuba and Venezuela to Syria and North Korea – as part of a global “Axis of Resistance”. PSL’s leaders openly justified actions like China’s Tiananmen Square crackdown and framed armed groups such as Hamas or the PFLP as national liberation movements fighting colonialism. In practice, PSL blended classic Marxist-Leninist class struggle with campist alignment: siding with virtually any force challenging U.S. and Israeli policies. This ideological line, inherited from its predecessor WWP, provided the lens through which PSL approached issues like the Palestine conflict (as an anti-colonial struggle) and U.S. wars (as imperialist aggression).

In these formative years, PSL’s activism on the ground reflected its ideology. Through its front, the ANSWER Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), PSL mobilised protests linking U.S. domestic and foreign issues. Notably, after President Trump recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in December 2017, ANSWER chapters joined nationwide rallies under the slogan “Jerusalem is Palestine!”.

PSL/ANSWER positioned themselves as champions of Palestinian solidarity, condemning U.S.-backed “genocide” in Gaza and asserting Palestinians’ “right to resist” occupation. At the same time, PSL engaged in domestic campaigns with a socialist anti-capitalist bent. For example, in early 2018 ANSWER’s Chicago branch – effectively PSL’s local arm – helped organise protests against Amazon’s proposed second headquarters, arguing that fighting corporate gentrification was part of the broader struggle against capitalist and racist structures.

In one such demonstration, a young organiser (Elias Rodriguez) publicly identified himself as an ANSWER Chicago member and declared that keeping Amazon out would be a “huge victory” for working-class communities. Through PSL’s guidance, activists like Rodriguez were taught to see local battles (police violence, gentrification) and international causes (Palestine, anti-war efforts) as interconnected fronts in a Marxist-Leninist fight. The PSL/ANSWER network thus provided the early ideological training ground for Rodriguez – imbuing him with campist anti-imperialism and plugging him into a ready-made protest circuit. (Sources: Liberation News archives and ANSWER Coalition statements)

SJP and Hatem Bazian: Campus Radicalism and Anti-Colonial Framing

While PSL cultivated street protesters, the campus parallel in this period was Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), led in large part by ideologues like Dr. Hatem Bazian. Bazian – a UC Berkeley lecturer and co-founder of SJP – popularised an explicitly anti-colonial framing of the Palestinian struggle (influencewatch.org) (influencewatch.org). Under his influence, SJP chapters across universities portrayed Israel as a settler-colonial occupier akin to apartheid South Africa and advocated that Palestinians were fighting a righteous anti-colonial battle. By 2017–2018, SJP had grown to over 200 campus chapters and routinely referred to Palestinians as living under “occupation” since 1948, equating Israeli policies with apartheid and even Nazi-like oppression (influencewatch.org). SJP campus campaigns like Israel Apartheid Week drove this point home by drawing parallels between historic racial segregation and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians (influencewatch.org).

Through petitions, teach-ins, and protest actions, SJP pushed the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement as a moral imperative, positioning it as part of a global anti-colonial and anti-racist resistance. Bazian himself, as founder of SJP and the related group American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), exemplified this nexus: he lectured on racism and colonialism while spearheading pro-Palestine student activism (influencewatch.org) (influencewatch.org). Notably, the Anti-Defamation League later pointed out that SJP’s national organisation was co-founded by Bazian through AMP’s sponsorship, reflecting how closely his vision shaped the group’s direction (influencewatch.org).

On campuses, SJP fostered a culture of radical dissent that resonated with students like Rodriguez during his university years. SJP chapters regularly staged walkouts and demonstrations whenever Israeli officials or pro-Israel speakers visited, framing such events as anti-colonial protests. Their messaging tied the Palestinian cause to social justice narratives familiar to U.S. students.

For example, SJP activists often compared Palestinians’ plight to that of other marginalised groups; one SJP national statement explicitly linked the “erasure” of Black communities in America to the oppression of Palestinians abroad (influencewatch.org). Under Bazian’s guidance, terms like “settler-colonialism,” “ethnic cleansing,” and “intifada” entered campus discourse, giving young activists a vocabulary to cast the Israel-Palestine conflict in the same light as anti-apartheid or anti-racist struggles. This campus radicalism helped lay an ideological foundation for Rodriguez. Even if he was not a formal SJP leader or member, the anti-colonial framing and militant solidarity espoused by SJP were part of the activist milieu that he absorbed as a student. In essence, SJP made the Palestinian struggle locally accessible and morally urgent to young American leftists, providing a formative influence on how Rodriguez came to view imperialism and resistance. (Sources: InfluenceWatch summary of SJP and Bazian’s statements) (influencewatch.org) (influencewatch.org)

Jewish “Ethical” Anti-Zionism

Parallel to SJP’s campus organizing, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) offered a Jewish anti-Zionist perspective that further legitimised hardline Palestine activism in 2017–2018. JVP presented itself as the “Jewish wing” of the Palestine solidarity movement, rejecting Zionism on moral grounds (jewishvoiceforpeace.org) (ngo-monitor.org).

“Jewish Voice for Peace is guided by a vision of justice, equality and freedom for all people. We unequivocally oppose Zionism because it is counter to those ideals,” the group declared, emphasizing that their stance against Israel’s state ideology stemmed from Jewish ethical principles (jewishvoiceforpeace.org). In 2018, JVP formally issued a declaration cutting ties with Zionism, characterizing modern Zionism as a settler-colonial project that had established an apartheid-like regime in Palestine (jewishvoiceforpeace.org). This pronouncement, labelling Israel’s founding as a “false and failed answer” to Jewish persecution, underscored JVP’s commitment to what might be called ethical anti-Zionism: the belief that true Jewish values demand solidarity with the oppressed, in this case Palestinians. (jewishvoiceforpeace.org) (jewishvoiceforpeace.org).

Importantly for the broader movement, JVP translated its principles into on-the-ground campaigns that intersected with both campus and community activism. By 2017, JVP was a leading force in BDS efforts in the U.S., often partnering with SJP on college divestment resolutions and lobbying city councils on related issues (ngo-monitor.org). One notable example came in April 2018 when activists, including JVP members, successfully pressured the Durham, NC City Council to ban police-exchange training programs with Israel (ngo-monitor.org). JVP argued that U.S. police militarisation was being reinforced by Israeli counterinsurgency tactics, thus linking the Palestinian cause to domestic racial justice, a tangible application of their “from Ferguson to Palestine” solidarity slogan (ngo-monitor.org). The group did not shy away from supporting controversial figures aligned with Palestinian resistance; for instance, JVP chapters advocated on behalf of prisoners like Ahmed Sa’adat (of the PFLP) and defended activists convicted of anti-Israel terrorism, framing such individuals as fighters against colonial oppression (ngo-monitor.org). Through petitions, sit-ins, and public rituals (like saying Kaddish for Gazan victims), JVP gave Jewish validation to militant anti-Israel stances. This had a powerful normalising effect: young activists like Rodriguez saw that even segments of the Jewish community condemned Zionism as unjust. Indeed, by late 2023 Rodriguez was echoing JVP-style rhetoric – one neighbour recalled his apartment windows displaying a sign reading “Tikkun Olam means Free Palestine,” invoking a Jewish social justice concept against Israel. Such convergence was no accident. JVP’s Jewish “ethical” anti-Zionism provided a moral veneer and broadened coalition for the radical Palestine movement, reinforcing to activists that anti-Zionism was not hate, but principled resistance. (Sources: JVP statements and NGO Monitor report) (jewishvoiceforpeace.org) (ngo-monitor.org)

Early Operational Cross-Pollination

By 2017–2018, these various strands – Marxist anti-imperialists, campus anti-colonialists, and Jewish anti-Zionists – began to converge in practice. Operational cross-pollination was evident in multi-group coalitions and shared actions that foreshadowed the wider networks Rodriguez would later engage. A striking example came on October 20, 2017, when activists from across ideological lines united at a protest outside Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home. That demonstration, organised jointly by ANSWER Chicago (PSL’s front), the People’s Congress of Resistance, and a local Black Lives Matter affiliate (Women of Faith), demanded justice for police victim Laquan McDonald while also opposing Chicago’s bid for Amazon’s HQ2 (royfmc.com). Elias Rodriguez was photographed at the event holding an ANSWER Coalition sign, literally standing at the intersection of causes – police brutality, racial gentrification, anti-corporate organizing – that the coalition linked together (royfmc.com) (foxnews.com).

During the rally, he argued that Laquan’s murder and Amazon’s development plans were “not two separate issues” but both rooted in structural racism and capitalism (foxnews.com). This messaging reflected the influence of all his networks: the anti-racist framing from BLM circles, the anti-capitalist analysis from PSL, and the anti-colonial rhetoric (referring to “ethnic cleansing” via gentrification) reminiscent of SJP/JVP narratives (foxnews.com). Through such joint operations, early on, Rodriguez experienced how disparate movements could reinforce each other’s narratives. PSL, for instance, brought its members to Black-led protests, and Black activists in turn lent support to Palestine-focused events, forging a feedback loop of radicalisation. Chicago Black organisers later confirmed that Rodriguez had been a familiar face at BLM protests in 2015–2017, showing up in solidarity after Laquan McDonald’s killing (royfmc.com). In those moments, an implicit exchange took place: he lent his voice against anti-Black police violence, and in return absorbed the moral urgency of fighting oppression everywhere – be it in Chicago or Palestine.

Beyond local events, organisations were explicitly endorsing each other’s struggles, creating a latticework of support that transcended single issues. SJP chapters issued statements backing movements like Black Lives Matter, framing U.S. police violence and Israeli violence as two faces of systemic racism (influencewatch.org). Conversely, prominent Black activists and groups began speaking out for Palestine, notable was the 2016 Movement for Black Lives platform that labelled Israel an “apartheid” state, and ongoing Black–Palestinian solidarity initiatives.

Meanwhile, leftist Jewish activists built bridges with Muslim and Arab-American groups: in late 2016, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) honoured JVP with a “Defender of Liberty” award for its Palestine advocacy (ngo-monitor.org). Such recognition signalled that JVP’s Jewish anti-Zionists and groups like CAIR or AMP were working hand-in-glove despite religious/cultural differences. This cross-pollination extended to strategic cooperation as well. By 2018, joint campaigns were common – for example, the Deadly Exchange initiative saw JVP, SJP, and BLM-aligned activists collectively pressure municipalities to end police training ties with Israel, marrying the defund-police movement to the BDS cause (ngo-monitor.org). These alliances were not merely symbolic; they created a united front that amplified radical messages. Each protest or petition became an echo chamber where Marxist critiques of U.S. imperialism, anti-colonial indictments of Zionism, and domestic civil-rights grievances reinforced one another. Young activists like Rodriguez, moving through these circles, found a consistent through-line: a belief that U.S. capitalism, racism, and imperialism (especially support for Israel) were all interlocking targets. This early unity-in-action laid the social groundwork for more extreme steps later.

Notably, it was during this phase that the idea of internationalizing the struggle was first seeded. In late 2018, veteran left figures Bernie Sanders and Yanis Varoufakis announced plans for a Progressive International to unite activists “across borders” against the rising global right wing. While the Progressive International (launched in 2020) represented a broader left alignment (more social-democratic and human-rights oriented than PSL’s campism), its emergence complemented the networks Rodriguez was part of. It signalled that the domestic coalitions he knew were poised to plug into a worldwide alliance of progressives, all opposed to common foes of neoliberalism, racism, and militarism. In short, by the end of 2018 the U.S. radical left infrastructure was interconnected and increasingly coordinated, providing Elias Rodriguez with a web of ideological and operational linkages that would foreshadow the escalations of the coming years. (Sources: Chicago protest coverage (royfmc.com); NGO Monitor on movement alliances (ngo-monitor.org) (ngo-monitor.org); Progressive International announcement)

Rodriguez’s Entry: Sponsored by PSL to People’s Congress of Resistance

Elias Rodriguez’s personal radicalisation truly began in the fall of 2017, when he was a 23-year-old University of Illinois at Chicago student hungry to “fight the Trump agenda.” His entry point was the People’s Congress of Resistance, a national left-wing conference held in Washington, D.C. on September 16–17, 2017. The event – spearheaded by PSL leaders as a “new revolutionary front” for grassroots organisers – drew over 600 activists from across the country to Howard University to strategise resistance to Trump-era policies (www2.pslweb.org). Rodriguez, then an unknown college graduate, was sponsored in spirit by his local PSL/ANSWER chapter to attend. In practice, he launched a GoFundMe campaign to cover travel costs, raising about $240 from supporters for the trip. Making that journey to D.C. was a formative leap. Immersed in an atmosphere of Marxist teach-ins and militant rhetoric, Rodriguez rubbed shoulders with seasoned PSL cadre, campus leftists, and community organisers from around the U.S. The conference’s messaging, which linked domestic struggles (from police killings to healthcare) with international fights against U.S. imperialism, resonated deeply with him. It effectively baptised Rodriguez into the radical left, giving him a sense of belonging in a national movement. As one report noted, Rodriguez “had to come” because he felt the moment was historic, suggesting how inspired he was by the prospect of unified action (www2.pslweb.org). Indeed, PSL’s own newspaper later identified him as a participant, indicating his presence did not go unnoticed in activist circles (royfmc.com).

Returning to Chicago, Rodriguez wasted no time putting his newfound convictions into action. In October 2017, barely a month after People’s Congress, he emerged at the forefront of a protest outside Mayor Emanuel’s residence, megaphone in hand. PSL’s Chicago branch integrated him into their local campaigns, billing him as one of their own. At that rally (co-organised with Black Lives Matter activists), Rodriguez was explicitly introduced as a member of PSL and ANSWER Chicago (foxnews.com). He boldly drew connections between U.S. police violence and capitalist development, echoing talking points he had absorbed in D.C. When Amazon shortlisted Chicago for a new headquarters, Rodriguez condemned the plan, saying resources for a mega-corporation would come at the expense of marginalised communities – the same “structurally racist” system he blamed for Black Chicagoans’ oppression (foxnews.com).

Media footage from early 2018 captured him at multiple ANSWER protests against Amazon’s HQ2, where he held up yellow ANSWER placards and told reporters that keeping Amazon out would show “the power of people coming together” to resist exploitation (royfmc.com). These appearances solidified Rodriguez’s reputation in Chicago’s activist scene as a committed young militant. By his own later account, he had been closely following the Palestinian cause since around 2014, and now through PSL/ANSWER he finally had a vehicle to act on those convictions. It is telling that in PSL’s circles, Palestine was always on the agenda – the same January 2018 week he protested Amazon, PSL’s social media was blasting out calls to “stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza” (royfmc.com). Rodriguez was thus inhabiting a militant echo chamber that reinforced the idea that all his causes, local and global, were part of one fight.

However, Phase I of Rodriguez’s journey ended as abruptly as it began. His formal ties to PSL were short-lived. By the summer of 2018, he had graduated college and, according to PSL, drifted out of the organisation. (PSL later publicly stressed that his association with one branch was “brief” and “ended in 2017”). Indeed, between 2019 and 2022, Rodriguez virtually vanished from activist events. He worked mundane jobs and did not join new groups, suggesting a hiatus. But the foundations had been laid. The network contacts, ideological training, and protest experience he gained in 2017–18 did not disappear, they went dormant. When he re-engaged in late 2023 amid the Gaza war flare-up, Rodriguez still knew the slogans, the groups, and the logic of “resistance” he first learned in Phase I. The PSL may have disowned him by name, but its imprint, along with that of SJP’s anti-colonialism and JVP’s moral zeal, stayed with him. As Phase I ended, Elias Rodriguez stood at a crossroads: a young radical with a foot in multiple movements, not actively organizing yet thoroughly marinated in their worldview. The U.S. domestic foundations of his radicalisation were in place.

Phase II: Radicalisation in Dormancy (2020–2022)
Internationalizing the Cause: Progressive International and PSL

The Progressive International (PI) formally launched on May 11, 2020 as a global left-wing network uniting activists, trade unions, and parties. Its ideology was explicitly anti-imperialist and anti-colonial; solidarity with Palestine became a “defining theme” of PI’s work. PI leaders publicly framed Israel’s occupation as part of a broader rise in authoritarian militarism. Jeremy Corbyn, Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein and others joined PI’s council, while PI’s official “Wire” and campaigns regularly called for boycotts and sanctions against Israel.

In effect, PI stitched the Palestinian struggle into an international anti-colonial narrative, linking U.S. imperialism, Western governments, and Israel under one umbrella.

The U.S. Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) – a Marxist-Leninist offshoot of Workers World Party – has long been central to this transnational network. PSL inherited the ANSWER Coalition (an anti-war front originally founded by WWP) after a 2004 split. As such, PSL activists remained heavily involved in PI-aligned initiatives. For example, PI press releases on Palestine list “Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), USA” among endorsers, highlighting PSL’s integration into the PI coalition (progressive.international). In practice, PSL cadres used PI’s platforms to amplify pro-Palestinian narratives: PI-affiliated newsletters carried PSL/ANSWER statements during the 2021 Gaza war, and PSL delegates joined PI conferences on anti-colonial strategy. Thus, from 2020 onward PI and PSL co-promoted a unified global Palestine narrative, with PSL’s People’s Forum and ANSWER networks helping to internationalise the U.S. protest discourse (progressive.international).

SJP, AMP, and JVP: Collaborative Protest Architecture

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) formed a de facto coalition organizing many U.S. pro-Palestine demonstrations. SJP is a nationwide student network (200+ chapters) originally co-founded by Hatem Bazian, who later became chairman of AMP (en.wikipedia.org). This leadership overlap symbolised the tight SJP–AMP link: AMP long funded and trained campus activists. A 2024 report notes that AMP gave “significant organisational support” to SJP chapters, and even admitted to funding JVP (isgap.org). JVP itself brands a “multi-racial, cross-class” movement of U.S. Jews standing in solidarity with Palestinians (apnews.com). In practice, AMP and SJP frequently co-sponsored events (e.g. campus rallies, “celebrate Nakba” gatherings), while JVP members often participated as Jewish allies.

For instance, an AP profile in late 2023 noted that JVP and IfNotNow activists led sit-ins alongside Muslim and student protestors, reflecting years of joint action building up in the ecosystem (apnews.com) (apnews.com).

Despite these alliances, each group retained its own focus and rhetoric. AMP and SJP tended to emphasise grassroots and youth mobilisation, whereas JVP cultivated explicitly Jewish-led legitimacy. During mass protests, AMP calls often invoked Palestinian rights and U.S. complicity (sometimes coordinating with Jewish partners like IfNotNow) (apnews.com). JVP, by contrast, pushed political remedies: in May 2021 JVP issued a press release urging support for BDS and cutting U.S. military aid to Israel (ngo-monitor.org). In sum, SJP, AMP, and JVP built a collaborative protest infrastructure; coordinating marches, campus walkouts, and media campaigns, but each brought different constituencies and slogans to the table. AMP and SJP messages cantered on solidarity and narrative unity, while JVP framed the struggle through Jewish values and nonviolent tactics (apnews.com) (ngo-monitor.org).

Gaza 2021: Unified Protest Front, Divergent Messaging on Violence

When Israel’s May 2021 offensive on Gaza erupted, the three groups mobilised large, coordinated rallies across the U.S. Thousands of protesters (students, religious groups, community activists) filled city streets from New York to San Francisco, demanding an immediate ceasefire. SJP chapters joined nationwide campus walkouts calling to end the bombardment (apnews.com), while AMP and JVP helped organise city-wide “ceasefire now” protests. An AP news investigation noted that long-time Palestine activists (including Jewish-led ones) became the principal organisers of these demonstrations (apnews.com). In effect, SJP, AMP, and JVP presented a united front in 2021: coalescing around shared calls for justice, blocking key streets, and drumming up media attention under a common anti-war banner.

However, this unity masked significant fissures over violence. JVP’s public messaging stayed strictly in the nonviolent lane: its 2021 communiqués demanded boycotts and decried civilian harm, without endorsing any militant actions (ngo-monitor.org). By contrast, some SJP members and allied voices openly praised Hamas’s assault as an act of “resistance” and spoke of armed struggle as legitimate.

In an October 2023 statement, SJP had asserted that supporting Palestinian “armed resistance” was a “moral imperative” (apnews.com), a stance that in spirit reflected its earlier 2021 posture.

AMP’s rhetoric sat in between: it framed Palestinian rocket fire as a reaction to oppression while mainly focusing on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Thus, even as AMP/SJP/JVP marched together in spring 2021, JVP kept the discourse centred on diplomacy and rights, while segments of AMP/SJP circles amplified more militant language. These internal tensions foreshadowed later splits in the movement over whether and how to publicly endorse violence.

Emergence of Palestine Action (UK): Militant Model Gains Attention

In the UK, a new model of direct action took root with Palestine Action, founded in 2020 by grassroots militants aiming to “shut down” Israel-linked arms manufacturers. From its inception, Palestine Action used striking tactics – occupying factory roofs, splattering red paint on Elbit Systems sites, and even sabotaging equipment – to halt weapons production. Its U.S. offshoot (Unity of Fields) explicitly described itself as a “militant front against the US–NATO–Zionist axis of imperialism”, adopting Third-Worldist anti-imperialist rhetoric. Activists in this network refused to condemn Palestinian armed attacks, instead labelling attackers as “political prisoners” or heroes. By 2021, Palestine Action’s high-profile vandalism and arsons at Israeli-affiliated sites had caught the eye of leftists around the world, who praised the UK group as a model of uncompromising resistance. This militant approach, blending anti-Zionism with broader anti-NATO imagery, stood in contrast to the mostly peaceful demonstrations favoured by AMP/SJP/JVP.

As Palestine Action’s profile grew, it began to influence U.S. activists. Wealthy benefactor James “Fergie” Chambers bankrolled the movement, funding legal support and personnel for both the UK and U.S. branches. In late 2023 he explicitly extended this militant playbook to America. Progressive International and PSL began spotlighting Palestine Action’s campaign as an example to emulate; PI’s media outlets featured articles on factory occupations, and PSL-aligned blogs highlighted unity with the “resistance” axis. By 2021, chapters of Unity of Fields (formerly the US wing of Palestine Action) formed and staged similar raids on military contractors in the U.S., drawing statements of solidarity from PI-linked networks. In short, the emergence of Palestine Action in the UK provided a concrete blueprint for more radical direct action; its tactics and ideological framing were rapidly circulated through PI/PSL channels, signalling a growing convergence around militant activism within the movement.

Jeremy Corbyn’s Involvement with Progressive International

Corbyn has been formally integrated into the Progressive International (PI) network. PI’s own Council page lists him as an MP and former Labour leader “and founder of the Peace and Justice Project” (progressive.international). Independent analysis likewise notes that “Jeremy Corbyn…sits on PI’s Council” and that his Peace & Justice Project is part of PI’s global coalition (progressive.international). In other words, Corbyn’s post-2017 platform is explicitly tied to PI’s alliance.

January 2025: Corbyn travelled to The Hague to attend the inaugural “Hague Group” meeting on Palestinian accountability. His parliamentary register shows that this trip (31 Jan–2 Feb 2025) was funded by Progressive International (theyworkforyou.com). PI convened the Hague Group as a coalition of nine nations to take coordinated legal and diplomatic action against Israel (for example, upholding ICC arrest warrants and banning arms and fuel transfers) (progressive.international).

January 2024: Corbyn went to The Hague again for South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice. Progressive International also sponsored this visit (10–11 Jan 2024) (theyworkforyou.com). He took part in a PI-organised press briefing and warned that the UK must not stand by as Palestinians face “annihilation” and a “massacre” (thecorbynproject.com) – a framing aligned with PI’s narrative that the Gaza assault is genocidal.

October 2021: Corbyn spoke at the Belmarsh Tribunal on Julian Assange, which was organised and hosted by Progressive International (thecorbynproject.com). (While this event concerned press freedom rather than Palestine, it was convened under PI’s anti-imperialist banner and demonstrates Corbyn’s participation in PI-backed actions.)

Corbyn’s public rhetoric on Palestine closely mirrors PI’s anti-Israel campaigns. Both he and PI explicitly use the language of genocide and ethnic cleansing. For example, PI’s “No Harbour for Genocide” campaign condemns Israel’s actions as “grave violations…including ethnic cleansing and genocide” and urges states to block arms and fuel shipments to Israel (progressive.international). Corbyn similarly denounced the Gaza war as the “annihilation” of the Palestinian people and an “unconscionable massacre” (thecorbynproject.com). He has even praised direct actions by groups like Palestine Action, noting, for instance, that after an “18-month campaign by Palestine Action,” Israel’s Elbit Systems closed its Oldham factory (progressive.international), language that echoes PI’s “Shut Elbit Down” messaging. (PI’s own coverage of PA actions declares “What Israel is doing…is nothing short of a genocide, and Elbit has blood on their hands” (progressive.international).

Both Corbyn and PI emphasise international legal pressure: he publicly urged the UK to support South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel (thecorbynproject.com), while PI helped launch the Hague Group to push states to enforce ICC warrants and bar arms/fuel transfers to Israel (progressive.international). In sum, Corbyn’s Peace & Justice Project advocacy on Palestine is in lockstep with PI’s campaigns, from framing Israeli policy as genocidal to advocating transnational legal and direct-action pressure on Israel (progressive.international) (progressive.international).

Ideological Traction: Rodriguez Becomes a True Believer

Elias Rodriguez’s trajectory epitomises the era’s radicalisation. Once a campus activist in ANSWER/PSL circles, he increasingly embraced a hardline Third-Worldist worldview. His private chats and manifestos (leaked after the 2025 Jewish museum shooting) show an unwavering allegiance to the so-called “axis of resistance” (Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.) and personal admiration for figures like Stalin. In a self-published manifesto entitled “Escalate for Gaza, Bring the War Home,” Rodriguez argued that nonviolent protest had been “insufficient” and weighed “the morality of armed demonstration,” concluding that violent action was the “only sane thing” in 2025 (homeland.house.gov). He even lauded Gaza protester Aaron Bushnell (who set himself on fire) as a martyr for the cause (stljewishlight.org). All of this language, talk of escalation, praise for extreme sacrifice, mirrored slogans circulating in pro-Hamas networks, showing how Gaza’s rhetoric had infused his ideology.

Rodriguez’s shift took place in synergy with the movement’s convergence. By 2023 he was attending PSL-organised demonstrations (for example, anti-India/U.S. protests funded by Neville Singham). His social media amplified PI/PSL-style narratives; he reposted content celebrating “people’s wars” abroad and condemning Zionism as racism.

As a result, longstanding U.S. socialist organisers noted that Rodriguez had become something of a “true believer” in the international resistance ethos promoted by PSL/PI. In sum, the evolution of Elias Rodriguez – from ANSWER cadre to vocal proponent of militant anti-imperialism – reflects the broader trend from decentralised campus activism to a more ideologically unified (and radicalised) pro-Palestinian network during 2019–2021.

Phase III: International Convergence and Escalation (2023)

During 2022–2023 a core theme of U.S. and international far-left activism became explicit alignment with authoritarian “resistance axis” regimes. Groups led by or allied with the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) increasingly framed Syria, Iran, and Russia as anti-imperialist allies. One analysis notes that PSL “leads U.S. anti-imperialist movements with strong alignment to regimes in Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, and China”. In practice, PSL and its partners argued that opposing any U.S. intervention meant defending even brutal dictatorships: “opposing any U.S. intervention or sanction becomes…paramount…even if that means publicly defending regimes like Assad’s Syria, Maduro’s Venezuela or Iran’s theocracy under the banner of ‘anti-imperialism’”. Progressive International (PI) publications similarly lionised axis countries, for example, issuing calls to lift U.S. “hybrid war” sanctions on Cuba, Venezuela and Iran, and treating Venezuelan leader Maduro’s contested 2024 election as a popular victory against imperialism.

Activists concretely invoked the Iran‐led “Axis of Resistance” concept. The new U.S. branch of Palestine Action even took its name from that ideology: its offshoot Unity of Fields bills itself as a “militant front against the U.S.–NATO–Zionist axis of imperialism,” a turn of phrase lifted from Iranian-backed Palestinian militants. The group notes its very name was drawn from Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s rhetoric, signalling affinity with Iran’s Axis of Resistance. Media and education platforms in this milieu echoed state propaganda. For instance, PSL-affiliated figures (e.g. Dan Kovalik and Richard Becker) routinely appear on Russian and Iranian state networks (RT, PressTV) pushing narratives that echo these regimes.

In sum, a significant segment of the left reframed Assad’s Syria, Iran’s theocracy, and Putin’s Russia as fellow victims of U.S./NATO imperialism, incorporating their talking points into activist literature and alternative media.

Chambers Enters: Funding Militancy via Palestine Action U.S.

In 2023, wealthy heir James “Fergie” Chambers dramatically escalated U.S. Palestine solidarity activism by bankrolling the new Palestine Action U.S. (later Unity of Fields). Leaked documents show Chambers funding direct‐action networks, paying legal fees and providing resources to militants targeting Israeli arms firms. By October 2023, his $250+ million inheritance enabled Palestine Action US to launch high-profile attacks (e.g. drenching an Elbit Systems office in red paint on Oct. 12) while Progressive International amplified the campaign with a global “#ShutElbitDown” strategy. A PI press release and coordinated protests credited Chambers’ backing, noting joint actions in over 40 cities (with PSL, CodePink, DSA, and others) on Dec. 21, 2023.

Chambers’ rhetoric and tactics reflect hard-line campism. He openly celebrated militancy on social media – a profile quotes him shouting “death to America” as a daily slogan while funding Palestine Action arrests. He has declared that Americans who “haven’t condemned” Israel are “to be hung for crimes against humanity” (airmail.news). Chambers is a self-identified Marxist-Leninist (with Stalin and Mao tattoos) who travels to conflicts in Syria and Ukraine on the side of Russian or Islamist forces. He has publicly urged “making Zionists and even ordinary American ‘colonisers’ afraid” – language echoing Iran-funded militias. In practice, Chambers helped fuse the Palestinian cause to broader anti-U.S. struggle: his support “suggests a coordinated effort to globalise local struggles, linking Palestine with anti-NATO and anti-US campaigns…in line with narratives promoted by Tehran, Moscow, and their allies”. In effect, his funding bridged leftist networks (PSL/Unity of Fields) with the Axis of Resistance framework, enabling tactical escalation on U.S. soil under a nihilistic anti-imperialist banner.

PSL’s Foreign Alignments and Narrative Ecosystem

Throughout 2022–23 the PSL promoted a consistent pro-authoritarian foreign-policy line. Its official statements on Russia’s February 24, 2022 invasion of Ukraine typify this: PSL “acknowledged ‘we do not support the Russian invasion,’” yet immediately reserved its “strongest condemnation” for the U.S. and NATO as alleged real aggressors. In other words, PSL’s rhetoric echoed Russian justifications (denouncing NATO expansion and repeating Putin’s calls for “demilitarisation” and “de-nazification” of Ukraine). In PSL’s media, NATO troops in Poland or U.S. aid budgets were to blame for the war, while Russia’s violations were downplayed. As one analysis found, PSL’s Ukraine messaging became “almost indistinguishable from the Russian government line”.

PSL applied the same filter to other conflicts. Its publications rarely criticise China or Iran; instead PSL outlets echo Beijing and Tehran’s talking points and deny documented abuses (e.g. dismissing Uyghur genocide claims as Western propaganda). Likewise, PSL has vigorously defended Cuba and Venezuela. For example, PSL helped organise “Hands Off Venezuela” rallies amid the 2019 crisis, blaming Venezuelan shortages solely on U.S. sanctions. When Venezuela re-elected Maduro in 2024, PI and PSL media celebrated it as a popular victory against imperialism. Throughout 2022–23, PSL-led networks even incorporated Hamas and Iranian-aligned narratives into their Palestine solidarity. PSL’s anti-Israel events and statements framed every Palestinian attack as resistance to “apartheid,” focusing outrage on Israeli actions. After Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, PSL called for ending U.S. aid to Israel and free Palestinian prisoners – assigning blame to Israeli policy rather than condemning the massacre (liberationnews.org). In short, PSL’s narrative ecosystem in this period consistently justified allied authoritarian states and militant groups under the rubric of anti-imperialism.

Key PSL publications and protests – from Liberation News articles to ANSWER coalition rallies – reflected this alignment, defending regimes like Assad’s Syria and Venezuela’s Maduro while consistently condemning the U.S. and Israel.

JVP, SJP, and Bazian Respond to Oct. 7, 2023: Differences in Tone

The Hamas October 7 attack sharply divided U.S. pro-Palestine groups. Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) publicly mourned the ~1,200 Israelis killed by Hamas as “deeply” tragic and warned against Israeli retaliation, even framing Israel’s subsequent operations as genocidal (jewishvoiceforpeace.org). (JVP explicitly “mourns deeply” the victims and described them as “our own families,” while accusing Israel and the U.S. government of “weaponizing these deaths” to justify a war in Gaza (jewishvoiceforpeace.org) In contrast, many Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapters and allied groups embraced the narrative of resistance. Within 24 hours SJP affiliates widely praised Hamas’s operation as a legitimate uprising. A national SJP toolkit shared on campuses urged students to “support and struggle alongside…our people back home” and to “normalise and support our fearless resistance,” stressing that “resistance comes in all forms — armed struggle, general strikes, and popular demonstrations” and that “all of it is legitimate”washingtonpost.com. American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) likewise signalled approval; legal filings note that AMP leaders taught campus organisers that “violent attacks are a justified response” to Zionism and that the whole point of activism is to “justify the terrorism of Hamas” as heroicwashingtonpost.com. In this period Hatem Bazian (an AMP co-founder) openly defended such rhetoric. Bazian denounced any criticism of these groups as anti-Palestinian “Islamophobic” smears and lashed out at the media suits, calling them “defamation [to] deflect from the live-streamed genocide in Gaza”washingtonpost.com. In summary, while JVP emphasised mourning victims on both sides and condemned Israeli military escalationjewishvoiceforpeace.org, SJP/AMP and Bazian embraced the attack as justified resistance – normalizing violence and labeling defenders “fearless,” and attacking opponents as guilty of racismwashingtonpost.comwashingtonpost.com.

Rodriguez in 2023: Full Embrace of Nihilistic Anti-Imperialism

By late 2023 Chicago activist Elias Rodriguez had transformed from a fringe ANSWER/PSL organiser into a lone agent of extremist violence. Though briefly involved with ANSWER in 2017–2018, he had long since left organised parties and operated on the fringes. Neighbours reported that in late 2023 his apartment windows were plastered with Palestinian solidarity slogans (“Tikkun Olam means Free Palestine,” “Justice for Wadea,” etc.), reflecting an obsessive identification with the Palestinian cause.

Phase IV: Unity of Fields and Domestic Insurrectionism (2024)

Rebranding and “Bring the War Home” Doctrine

In August 2024 the U.S. Palestine Action network formally rebranded as Unity of Fields (UoF). The new name was explicitly chosen to signal a shift from “passive solidarity” to outright militant propaganda against U.S. power. In its own announcement (cited in press reports), UoF declared it was “necessary to open a new front against the US empire” after October 7, 2023 (jpost.com) – in other words, to bring the Palestinian struggle directly to U.S. soil. The group emphasised that “empires do not just collapse on their own” and that “struggles against it have erupted … here in the core” (jpost.com). In plain language, UoF called for a decentralised insurgency “in the belly of the beast,” as it put it, framing the United States itself as a war zone that needed to be opened up. This rebranding broadened the mission from targeting Israeli war industries (the original Palestine Action focus) to also confronting American militarism and Zionist institutions at home (jpost.com).

UoF’s rhetoric consciously evoked Vietnam-era revolutionary slogans. Its rallying cry – to “bring the war home” – echoes the 1969 SDS campaign document “Bring the War Home,” which likewise urged anti-imperialists to open a new front on U.S. soil (sds-1960s.org). For example, on October 8, 2024 (the first anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks), UoF shared footage of “autonomous actors” smashing Harvard’s campus buildings and spraying red paint on statues in “solidarity with Palestine.” The video narrator vowed explicitly to “bring the war home” and “open up a new front here in the belly of the beast”. By using that language, Unity of Fields signalled a deliberate echo of the SDS-era call and an embrace of leaderless, decentralised militancy – encouraging isolated cells to self-organise and carry out guerrilla-style actions on U.S. campuses and streets.

Domestic Sabotage and Red Line Rhetoric

In late 2024 Unity of Fields began claiming or applauding a series of increasingly brazen anti-Israel actions on American soil. Videotapes and social-media posts showed nighttime attacks by unknown activists smashing windows and chaining themselves to doors of university and corporate buildings. In one high-profile case on Oct. 8, 2024, activists shattered windows at Harvard’s University Hall and splashed red paint on the John Harvard statue – actions UoF publicised online. Soon afterward UoF endorsed graffiti and vandalism at other sites: postings show the phrases “War Criminals Work Here” and “Death to Israel” sprayed on the walls of an Israeli defence contractor’s office and even scrawled on the walls of the Israeli Embassy building in Washington, D.C. In its own outlets, UoF treated these attacks as “open[ing] a new front” in solidarity with Palestinians – effectively declaring that branding institutions as complicit in “genocide” was a red line worth crossing on U.S. campuses. Unity of Fields urged followers to keep submitting videos of such sabotage, bragging on its channels about “anonymous” cells carrying out weekly property destruction in the U.S. (mirroring tactics first pioneered by Palestine Action in the UK) (jpost.com).

This wave of militant propaganda was openly laced with violent anti-Israel slogans. UoF’s own posts frequently used doomsday language. For example, its social accounts circulated clips of vandals yelling “Death to Israel!” as they sprinted away from cameras. After the Israeli Embassy incident, UoF celebrated the deed on social media, justifying the stencils of “Death” on embassy walls as a form of “resistance.” Around the same time, UoF member Chuck Callahan (aka Calla Walsh) noted on a left-wing wire service that traditional boycotts weren’t enough, urging activists to “materially impede imperialism” on U.S. soil.

This climate of direct-action enthusiasm, captured in viral videos tagged by UoF, helped normalise property destruction as a form of protest. Unity of Fields routinely presented vandalism (smashed glass, spray paint, broken locks) as heroic blows against Zionist targets, rather than isolated crimes. By late 2024 the group had effectively shifted the far-left Palestine cause from peaceful protest into a staged campaign of domestic sabotage, celebrating every escalatory incident on Twitter and encrypted chats as steps toward its “new front.”

Chambers’ Accelerationism and Justification of Fear

Behind UoF’s funds and strategy was James “Fergie” Chambers, a Cox media heir turned hard-line revolutionary. After inheriting a $250+ million fortune, Chambers became a principal backer of Palestine Action and its U.S. offshoot, paying activists’ bail and legal fees. He also emerged as a chief ideologue of this phase. Media profiles dubbed him a “communist trust-fund baby” whose wealth was being funnelled into anti-Zionist agitation. Chambers gave interviews in which he explicitly embraced violent escalation. In an exclusive Los Angeles Magazine interview he urged true radicals to use terror tactics: “We need to start making people who support Israel actually afraid to go out in public,” he said. “Make all of white America afraid that everything they have stolen is going to be burned to the ground.”. This quote, amplified by the ADL and press, laid bare his belief that fear must be weaponised: American backers of Israel should be personally terrorised, he argued, by the threat of arson or worse. In the same interview he even asserted, “We need a revolution… Israel does not have the right to exist” and hailed Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks as “a moment of hope and inspiration.” Such statements show Chambers articulating an accelerationist doctrine: that only by provoking terror and state repression can imperialism be overthrown.

Chambers’s role in late 2024 was both ideological and practical. He remained UoF’s covert sponsor, working (from bases in North Africa) to fund travel and legal defense for U.S. “actionists,” and to coordinate joint campaigns with allied groups. But he also became UoF’s public voice of militancy. He explicitly justified UoF’s tactics. In autumn 2024 he told media outlets that recent graffiti and broken windows should alarm Americans, arguing bluntly that the group wanted Israeli backers to be too afraid to walk the streets. With his deep pockets and anti-imperialist creed, Chambers helped give Unity of Fields its ideological edge: he framed arson, smash-and-grab, and intimidation as legitimate forms of class warfare, lending a veneer of Marxist “anti-racist” theory to what critics call terrorism. His fiery rhetoric, especially invoking race (“white America”) and revolutionary violence, was widely circulated within UoF circles, sharpening their brand as militants who had abandoned purely symbolic protest.

Phase V: The Embassy Attack and Ideological Denial (May 2025)

Rodriguez Echoes the Call: From Ideology to Operationalisation

Elias Rodriguez absorbed this militant climate in his final months of preparation. On May 21, 2025 he carried out a deadly shooting at Washington, D.C.’s Jewish Museum. By his own account, he “did it for Gaza”. Investigations of his online footprint reveal how UoF’s messaging had seeped into his worldview. Just hours before the attack, Rodriguez posted on Twitter a 900-word manifesto titled “Escalate for Gaza, Bring the War Home.”, this title, verbatim, echoed Unity of Fields’ slogan for 2024: taking the fight to the “belly of the beast.” In fact, UoF had used nearly identical phrasing in its propaganda videos. In his manifesto Rodriguez explicitly defended “armed demonstration” as morally justified and exhorted readers to “escalate for Gaza” by attacking Zionist targets on American soil (timesofisrael.com). The word “escalate”, and the metaphor of a battlefield were drawn straight from UoF. In leaked communications, he even urged like-minded peers to forgo peaceful protest in favour of actual violence, and to be ready to “bring the war home” in the U.S. context.

Rodriguez’s own posts and chat logs are littered with UoF-inspired imagery. On social media he screamed anti-American and anti-Israel slogans identical to the group’s propaganda line. For example, in early 2024 he posted a screenshot with caption “De@th 2 Amerikkka” and another saying “Happy New Year, Death To Israel”, language matching Unity of Fields’ calls for revolutionary justice (timesofisrael.com). One weeks before the shooting he wrote online that even an attack as extreme as a truck bombing of a newspaper “would [be]… the only sane thing to do” before debating it, reflecting UoF’s pleading for violent escalation (timesofisrael.com). In private chat logs obtained by Ken Klippenstein, he dismissed mainstream socialist groups (notably writing “PSL sucks” about the Party for Socialism and Liberation and urged comrades to take up clandestine action instead. In short, Rodriguez synthesised years of far-left Palestinian solidarity rhetoric, especially UoF’s emphasis on “autonomous” militancy, into a personal plan of action.

By May 2025, then, the “militant propaganda” of Unity of Fields had been operationalised in Rodriguez’s mind. His manifesto, his online behavior, and his final act all bore the unmistakable imprint of UoF’s doctrine of domestic insurrection. He explicitly framed killing Israeli diplomats on American ground as a political protest “for Palestine”, effectively echoing UoF’s narrative that the war had come home. In this way, the chain of influence is clear: wealthy backers and outside groups like UoF had injected hyperbolic violence into the discourse, and a lone actor like Rodriguez translated those ideas into bloodshed. As one analyst put it, his “Escalate for Gaza” manifesto was nearly word-for-word Unity of Fields’ slogan, a tragic vindication of their strategy to mobilise violence on U.S. soil

Fallout and Disavowals: How Each Group Responded

The immediate responses from established organisations were sharply divergent. PSL (Party for Socialism and Liberation) moved quickly to condemn Rodriguez. Within a day PSL’s national office stated unequivocally that he “is not a member of the PSL,” citing only a brief 2017 association, and rejected any violence against civilians. In public statements PSL leaders reiterated that Rodriguez’s actions were alien to their platform.

By contrast, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) – a U.S. Jewish‑led pro‑Palestine group – condemned the shooting in sorrowful terms. JVP said it “join[s] in mourning” the victims and reiterated that “all human life is precious,” adding that antisemitism and violence “have no place” even as it mourned the slain embassy staffers (commondreams.org).

Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) issued no public statement of support or condemnation in our sources. (National SJP generally encourages civil disobedience but has historically steered clear of endorsing outright violence, so its silence or low profile may reflect internal caution.) Progressive International (PI) – the global left alliance – did not comment specifically on Rodriguez. In fact, PI’s recent record shows it has explicitly refused to denounce Palestinian militancy: for example, in late 2023 PI called Hamas’s October 7 attack a “legitimate act of resistance” and affirmed the “inalienable right to resist” by any means. Thus, while PI itself released no statement, its prior messaging aligned closely with the rhetoric of resistance that underlies Rodriguez’s manifesto.

Individual figures offered contrasting tones. Hatem Bazian, a longtime pro‑Palestinian academic and SJP co-founder, made no public comment on Rodriguez’s case in our sources. Bazian has in past years urged “intifada in this country” (jcpa.org), but had no recorded reaction to the shooting. In stark contrast, Fergie Chambers (the activist billionaire who funds Palestine Action) did not distance himself. Chambers has historically celebrated militant tactics and made no statement of condemnation. In media interviews he has explicitly argued for making “people who support Israel … afraid” – a goal he said requires revolutionary tactics in the U.S. To date, he has not publicly repudiated Rodriguez’s act; indeed, his prior rhetoric is far closer in spirit to the “bring the war home” message Rodriguez embraced.

The “Free Elias” Campaign and Fringe Endorsements

Within a week of the DC shooting, radical activists moved to rehabilitate Rodriguez’s image. On May 26, Unity of Fields and 28 allied organisations announced a “Free Elias Rodriguez” Organizing Committee, praising his embassy shooting as a “legitimate act of resistance against the Zionist state and its genocidal campaign in Gaza”. The joint statement explicitly framed the murders in political terms, justifying the violence as retaliation for war.

Notably, this Free Elias campaign drew signers from across the far-left and pro‑Palestine scene. For example, the DSA Liberation Caucus – a Marxist‑Leninist faction within the Democratic Socialists of America – signed the statement as did the Bronx Anti‑War Coalition (an anti-war group co-founded by a JVP activist). Several other niche organisations and student groups (Palestinian solidarity clubs, activist caucuses, socialist cohorts) also publicly endorsed Rodriguez and vowed to defend him as a “political prisoner.”

This phenomenon revealed a cross‑pollination of causes. Although PSL itself declined to join the Free Elias effort, many of its ideological allies did. The endorsers included not only fringe far‑left entities but also activist collectives that intermingle class‑struggle themes with anti‑Zionism. (The Bronx Coalition’s involvement shows a tie between Palestinian activism and U.S. anti-war organizing.)

In broader context, these defenders reveal a pattern in which pro‑Palestine militants and anti-imperialist groups converge. Some of the endorsers are also connected to non‑Palestine causes (e.g. police abolition or racial justice), indicating ideological overlap. The campaign thus became a hub for various dissident networks, including those accused of “red‑brown” or accelerationist leanings, even if no mainstream left group formally joined.

Phase VI: Proscription and the Continuity of Militancy

Legal Proscription as Political Martyrdom

The UK’s June 2025 decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organization marked a watershed moment in the global criminalization of direct-action anti-Zionist networks. While Home Secretary Yvette Cooper emphasized the group’s “persistent criminal damage” and escalating disruption to British military infrastructure, the ban had transnational ripple effects—particularly for its U.S. offshoot, Unity of Fields (formerly Palestine Action US), and affiliated influencers such as Calla Walsh.

Far from de-escalating activity, the ban appears to have further radicalized segments of the activist network, reinforcing an internal narrative of state repression and just war. In messaging circulated by both Unity of Fields and international allies such as the Progressive International, the UK move was framed not as a blow but as validation—proof that militant resistance was “hurting the war machine.” The result has been a notable uptick in cross-border targeting of arms suppliers, not only to Israel but now increasingly to Ukraine and NATO-aligned states.

Continuity and Escalation of Targeting Tactics

A prime example of this evolution occurred on June 25, 2025, when pro-Palestinian militants vandalized the Belgian arms manufacturer FN Herstal, which supplies rifles to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. According to Ukrainian media reports, red paint was splashed across the facility’s gates, and slogans denouncing “NATO genocide” were spray-painted on nearby infrastructure.
(nv.ua)

While the action was not officially claimed by Unity of Fields, the tactical signature—red paint, symbolic “blood” imagery, and militarized language—mirrors past attacks on Elbit Systems facilities in both the UK and U.S. Indeed, internal campaign planning documents previously circulated among Unity of Fields organizers had named European weapons manufacturers supplying both Israel and Ukraine as “secondary targets” in the event of PI’s “No Harbour for Genocide” escalation.

This geographic and strategic diffusion marks a new phase. The campaign has moved from national focus (i.e., shutting Elbit in Britain) to a broader anti-NATO posture encompassing:

• Ukraine’s Western arms pipeline
• Military contractors serving both Israeli and Ukrainian forces
• European states perceived as complicit in “imperialist war”

This reframing aligns squarely with the ideological lexicon advanced by Rodriguez, whose leaked manifesto condemned both Israel and “NATO-Zionist fascism.”

The Walsh Doctrine: Militant Propaganda as Strategy

Central to this escalation is Calla Walsh, whose Canary Mission profile provides a clear record of radicalization, from local protests to international movement-building. As co-founder of Palestine Action U.S. and public face of Unity of Fields, Walsh has advocated what she terms “militant propaganda”—a strategy that seeks not only to shut down arms suppliers, but to spark wider ideological insurgency through symbolic spectacle and civil resistance.

Statements captured in the Canary Mission archive reveal that Walsh celebrated violent resistance, endorsed “intifada everywhere,” and positioned Palestine solidarity not as charity or activism, but as anti-colonial warfare. Her influence—particularly on younger radical activists and those adjacent to PI—cannot be overstated. In the wake of the UK’s proscription, Walsh has continued to signal endorsement of militant disruption, amplifying videos of paint attacks, direct actions, and prison support for arrested comrades.

Her quote featured by Progressive International in 2023, “We must organize targeted, direct actions… We dare you to stop us”, has aged into prophecy.

Strategic Implications

The emerging movement logic suggests three key strategic pivots:

1. Dispersal: With UK operations criminalized, militant energy is shifting to continental Europe (Belgium, Germany) and to U.S.-based symbolic targets (arms expos, university labs, pro-Israel institutions).
2. Convergence: The targeting of Ukraine-linked firms indicates ideological merger between anti-Zionism and anti-NATO/anti-Ukraine narratives—mirroring narratives pushed by PressTV, Grayzone, and parts of the Russian-aligned information ecosystem.
3. Narrative Pre-emption: The movement is now pre-emptively framing repression as proof of legitimacy, using each arrest or ban to bolster its revolutionary bona fides and recruit new adherents.

Rodriguez and the Path from Rhetoric to Violence

In this light, the Rodriguez attack appears less as an outlier and more as the inevitable outcome of a movement structure that rewards rhetorical militancy and provides a framework for escalation. Although Rodriguez acted alone, his political language—citing “the Zionist genocide machine” and “the necessity of resistance”—was not drawn from thin air. It had been rehearsed, published, and legitimized in forums curated by Walsh, Unity of Fields, and even international bodies like PI.

The UK proscription of Palestine Action may dismantle its legal infrastructure in Britain. But as long as its ideological successors, operating under names like Unity of Field, continue to export the same logic, Rodriguez’s act of violence remains part of the script.

Conclusion: Narrative Responsibility and Tactical Distancing

The pro-Palestine movement, in both its moderate and militant forms, clearly shaped the ideological context that Elias Rodriguez inhabited. Slogans like “bring the war home” and “open a new front” were not fringe concepts—they were propagated by groups such as Unity of Fields, endorsed by Progressive International (PI), and reflected verbatim in Rodriguez’s manifesto.

This alignment extended beyond rhetoric. PI’s 2023 “Gaza Resolution” co-signed by dozens of affiliated groups, affirmed a right to resistance that included armed struggle. PSL had long portrayed Palestinian armed resistance as legitimate. The movement’s symbolic language thus served as a script Rodriguez internalised—one that framed violence not as aberrant, but as morally justified.

And yet, when Rodriguez acted, the same networks pulled back. PSL publicly claimed he was no longer a member. JVP and DSA figures condemned the act unequivocally. PI issued no support, instead joining others in suggesting the killing harmed the Palestinian cause. This is a familiar pattern in radical politics: ideological provocation followed by tactical disavowal. The Weather Underground’s 1970s bombings sparked similar dynamics, where rhetorical endorsement of violence later met organisational denial.

Rodriguez’s act was not the product of a formal command structure, but it was also not wholly unpredictable. He acted as a self-radicalised product of a highly networked movement that blurred the line between resistance and incitement. The memes, slogans, and ideological affirmations he adopted were not invented in isolation; they were cultivated within a distributed x`activist ecosystem.

This investigation reveals the consequences of that ambiguity. The trajectory from initial involvement to private radicalisation, encouraged by figures like Fergie Chambers and movements like Unity of Fields, demonstrates how decentralised rhetoric can create violent outcomes.

The ideological responsibility may be diffuse, but it is not absent. Without mechanisms for internal accountability, movements that romanticise militancy may incubate lone actors like Rodriguez.