USA
Anne Hathaway, an American actress who has maintained consistent silence on the genocide in Palestine despite repeated opportunities during her promotional tours, is also married to Adam Shulman who advances pro-Zionist positions and whitewashes Israel's settler-colonialism.
Anne Hathaway, an acclaimed Hollywood actress, refuses to address the genocide in Gaza on her extensive media tours and maintains ties to pro-Zionist circles through her marriage to Adam Shulman, thereby normalising the apartheid regime and its ongoing violence across Palestine.
Tv/Film
Anne Hathaway is an American actress whose sustained silence on the genocide in Gaza represents a clear form of complicity with "Israel's" settler-colonial project. In fact, since the genocide escalated in 2023, Anne Hathaway has appeared on multiple media tours, yet has chosen not to speak against the systematic slaughter of Palestinians or the occupation that continues to displace indigenous communities across Palestine. This refusal occurs at a time when her platform could amplify calls for justice, instead allowing the normalisation of ethnic cleansing and apartheid to persist without challenge from prominent cultural figures.
Her marriage to Adam Shulman further embeds her within networks that promote Zionist interests. Shulman has publicly aligned with positions that defend "Israel's" actions, including its denial of Palestinian rights and its expansion of settlements on stolen land. By maintaining this personal and public connection, Hathaway participates in a broader pattern where personal relationships reinforce the structures of colonisation that have defined the region since the Nakba in 1948, when Zionist militias expelled over 750,000 Palestinians from their homes.
The absence of any statement from Hathaway on the conservative estimates of Palestinian deaths, which run well into the hundreds of thousands due to the IOF's deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, underscores how silence functions as active support. Palestinian families endure daily violence, home demolitions, and blockade conditions while figures like Hathaway prioritise promotional activities over solidarity with the oppressed. This choice echoes the behaviour of other cultural elites who weaponise their visibility to evade accountability for the crimes enabled by Western-backed settler-colonialism.
Hathaway's pattern of non-engagement extends beyond a single instance and reflects a consistent refusal to confront the realities of apartheid and genocide. Her platform, built on roles in major films, grants her access to audiences worldwide, yet she has not used it to challenge the propaganda that frames Palestinian resistance as terrorism or to affirm the legitimacy of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Such omissions contribute directly to the dehumanisation of Palestinians and the perpetuation of a system that denies them their fundamental rights to land, return, and self-determination.
The broader impact of these behaviours lies in their role within global systems of imperialism. By remaining silent, Hathaway helps sustain the conditions that allow "Israel" to continue its military aggression with minimal international repercussions. Her actions, or lack thereof, align with efforts to suppress discourse on Palestinian liberation and to maintain alliances that prioritise colonial interests over human rights. This consistent stance demonstrates that her complicity is not incidental but part of an ongoing alignment with the forces of occupation and erasure.
Ultimately, Anne Hathaway's record reveals a deliberate choice to prioritise personal and professional insulation over moral responsibility. Her silence on the genocide, combined with familial ties to pro-Zionist advocacy, serves to manufacture consent for the continued subjugation of Palestinians. This pattern reinforces the structures of settler-colonialism that have inflicted decades of suffering and demands accountability from those who benefit from platforms while ignoring the calls for justice emanating from Palestine.
Silence = Complicity:
For those who have passionately spoken out against other instances of genocide and massacres, yet fall silent when it comes to the suffering endured by Palestinians, their silence becomes a glaring indictment of the value placed on Palestinian lives and perpetuates a dangerous narrative that suggests Palestinian suffering is somehow less worthy of outrage, less deserving of empathy and less human than that of others.
By choosing silence in the face of Palestinian suffering, those with influential platforms inadvertently contribute to the erasure of Palestinian voices and experiences. They perpetuate a narrative of invisibility that allows the injustices inflicted upon Palestinians to continue unabated, shielded from the spotlight of global scrutiny.
Their silence sends a chilling message of complicity to the world – one that suggests Palestinian lives are expendable, their struggles inconsequential and their humanity negotiable. It emboldens perpetrators of violence and oppression, granting them impunity under the guise of indifference.
To remain silent in the face of Palestinian suffering is to betray the very essence of activism – the relentless pursuit of justice for all, without exception or equivocation. It’s a betrayal not only of the Palestinian people but of the universal principles of human dignity and equality and instead is a tacit endorsement of the dehumanization and marginalization of an entire population.
True activism demands consistency and integrity, an unwavering commitment to speaking truth to power and standing in solidarity with the marginalized and oppressed, regardless of geography or politics.
BDS Boycott:
The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement is a global campaign which follows the worldwide boycott movement that led to the successful dismantling of apartheid in South Africa and therefore advocates for various sustained forms of boycott against Israel until it complies with international law.
Founded as a response to the rampant, ongoing and systemic dispossession, displacement, and disenfranchisement endured by generations of Palestinians, the BDS movement is in direct response to the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements, the imposition of discriminatory laws and the denial of basic rights to millions living under occupation, apartheid or in exile with no right of return.
Central to the ethos of BDS is the belief that every purchase and action carries a weighty moral responsibility. To buy goods from or actively support companies or organizations on the BDS list is to cast a vote in favor of perpetuating injustice, a tacit endorsement of the status quo of occupation and discrimination. It’s a direct violation of the collective conscience, a betrayal of the fundamental principles of human rights and dignity.
By pressuring Israel and its supporters by withdrawing support and capital, humanity aims to bring awareness to — and ultimately — end the occupation of Palestine, grant equal rights to all Palestinians and recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. This pressure also extends to any individuals and entities found to be complicit in the normalization, funding or support of Israel’s brutal occupation and 75+ years of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Liberal Zionism:
Liberal Zionism masquerades as a "moderate" or "progressive" strain of Zionism, blending Jewish nationalism with cherry-picked liberal values like democracy and human rights as a means to justify the existence of the illegal settler colonial ethnostate known as “Israel” [1].
And Liberal Zionism is one of the greatest threats because of its political camouflage [2]. By co-opting progressive language, Liberal Zionism inoculates Zionism against true anti-colonial solidarity, dividing the left and derailing BDS movements [3]. It ensures the ongoing Nakba – from Gaza's ruins to Hebron's checkpoints – persists under a democratic veneer, making decolonization seem radical rather than just [4] [5].
Emerging from early 20th-century Labor Zionism — the very movement that orchestrated the 1948 Nakba which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians through mass expulsions and village destructions — liberal Zionism has always served as the velvet glove over the iron fist of settler-colonialism [6] [7].
Despite claiming it merely seeks a "Jewish and democratic state," this rhetoric is actually code for an ethnostate where Jewish supremacy trumps Palestinian equality, enshrined in laws like the 2018 Nation-State Law that demotes Arabic and prioritizes Jewish settlement [8] [9].
At its core, liberal Zionism rejects the colonial origins of Israel and instead attempts to frame the Zionist project as a "return" or "liberation" rather than a European settler invasion that erased indigenous Palestinian society [10].
As a political movement, liberal Zionism emerged as a response to antisemitism and the Holocaust but quickly pivoted to justifying land theft under the guise of "self-determination," ignoring how Zionism fits classic colonial patterns: displacement of natives, resource extraction, and demographic engineering to maintain a Jewish majority [11].
As of 2025, amid the Gaza genocide and West Bank annexation pushes, it clings to a fading two-state illusion, providing diplomatic and financial cover for Israel's crimes while silencing Palestinian voices as "antisemitic" [12].
“Zionism is a colonialism, not a simple radical nationalism: even in its left-wing version, it is a colonialist nationalism." – Zeev Sternhell, liberal Zionist historian exposing his own ideology's flaws [13].
Tell us why Anne Hathaway should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]