Democratic Socialists of America Co-Chair Sparks Outrage Over October 7 Comments
Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) co-chair Megan Romer is facing intense backlash from pro-Israel organizations after declaring in a recent interview that the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel was largely “inevitable.” Speaking with The New Yorker’s David Remnick, Romer defended her ideological alignment and stated that the surprise attack—which killed approximately 1,200 people and resulted in over 200 hostages being taken into Gaza—was a predictable outcome of Israeli policies in the region.
The remarks have ignited a fierce political firestorm, drawing swift condemnations from groups such as the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and the Coalition for Jewish Values. As the DSA continues to expand its footprint within mainstream American politics, boasting more than 120,000 members and 250+ elected officials across 40 states, statements from its top leadership are intensifying scrutiny over the far-left organization’s foreign policy stances and ideological direction.
Inside the Interview That Triggered Nationwide Condemnation
The controversy erupted following an interview in which Remnick questioned Romer about democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Chevalier had attended an anti-Israel, pro-Hamas rally in New York City on October 8, 2023—just one day after the terrorist assault. When Remnick asked Romer if she would have attended that rally had she been in a similar position, Romer answered affirmatively.
“That’s a good question. I probably would have,” Romer replied, noting that she did not live in New York City at the time. Pressed further on whether she would rally behind Hamas immediately following the slaughter of 1,200 people, Romer demurred on supporting the terror group directly while doubling down on her assessment of the root causes.
“I think that Oct. 7 was largely inevitable,” Romer stated during the interview. “If you put people in an open-air concentration camp and you deprive them of rights, of dignity, of food, of the ability to live in safety, you have to expect that they are going to not take that for that long. And that is not defending any harm of civilians or of non-combatants.” When Remnick accused her remarks of expressing support for violence, Romer pushed back, insisting she was simply describing an inevitability.
According to reporting from the New York Post, Romer also declared that backing economic or defense support for Israel represents a “solid red line” within her movement, which has increasingly made its presence felt in Democratic primary elections across the United States.
Pro-Israel Groups and Civil Rights Leaders Push Back
Pro-Israel organizations mobilized rapidly to denounce Romer’s characterization of the attacks. Zionist Organization of America National President Morton A. Klein issued a sharp rebuke, telling Fox News Digital that while he agreed the attacks were in many ways inevitable, he entirely rejected the reasons cited by the DSA leader.
“When Gazans elected Hamas – a terror organization whose charter calls for murdering every Jew and destroying Israel, October 7 was the result,” Klein stated. He further pointed to foreign funding from Qatar and Iran, educational materials distributed by UNRWA, and prior border policy decisions as the true structural precursors to the violence, warning that failure to disarm Hamas or maintain strategic buffer zones could invite future attacks.
The Anti-Defamation League took to X (formerly Twitter) to voice its profound alarm over the rhetoric. The organization argued that Romer’s framing puts Jewish Americans at risk by normalizing demonizing narratives against the world’s only Jewish state. “There is no justification for rape, kidnapping, torture, and slaughter,” the ADL posted, highlighting that Romer referred to the massacre as a mere “revolt.”
Adding to the chorus of condemnation, Coalition for Jewish Values Executive Vice President Rabbi Yaakov Menken characterized the DSA co-chair’s commentary as “objectively antisemitic.” Menken argued that Romer utilized a “mythological inversion of reality to justify both a murderous pogrom and an ongoing plan of starvation, torture, rape, and murder.”
Broader Policy Positions and Political Realities
Beyond the October 7 remarks, Romer’s interview with The New Yorker and subsequent reporting by the New York Post shed light on the broader platform of the DSA leadership. During the exchange, Romer reaffirmed her commitment to defunding police departments entirely, defining the policy as taking money away from law enforcement to invest fully in social services and schools.
On the international front, Romer defended the organization’s skepticism toward foreign entanglements, including opposition to U.S. military and financial assistance for Ukraine against Russian aggression. She also pointed to Cuba as a model of governance, downplaying authoritarian concerns while praising its constitutional framework.
As these positions gain visibility through primary electoral contests nationwide, the divide between mainstream Democratic Party leadership and its democratic socialist wing remains a central friction point in American politics. Observers note that rhetoric surrounding foreign policy flashpoints like the Gaza conflict will likely remain a high-stakes battleground for voters and party strategists alike. How do you think mainstream political parties should handle widening ideological divides over foreign policy? Let us know your thoughts in the discussion below.
