Image credit: No Votes for Genocide logo (taken from the petition website: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/no-votes-for-genocide) layered over the presidential column of the Newark, NJ sample ballot. Created by Renee Johnston

Newark, NJ - The NJ Uncommitted movement, after earning over 40,000 votes during the New Jersey Democratic primaries in June, reemerged as No Votes for Genocide (NVFG) launched on September 1. The organization, led by Mona Dalia, a Palestinian healthcare worker and organizer, and Martina Manicastri is an organizer with Central New Jersey DSA; with the support of Ghada Elnajjar, a political activist and community organizer with the “No Peace, No Peach” movement out of Georgia. 

No Votes for Genocide, a broad coalition of citizens standing against the genocide in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, emerged as the central framework to reconcile the disparate voices of the NJ Uncommitted movement. The new formation is a clear break from the National Uncommitted organization.

No Votes for Genocide, both a petition and direct action movement, requested voters agree not to vote for any candidate in the 2024 national election who did not call for an arms embargo and a permanent ceasefire in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. However, the petition's focus was the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris.

Public Square Amplified Political Writer, Renee Johnston, spoke with Martina Manicastri, one of the lead organizers with No Votes for Genocide (NVFG) to understand the current work of the organization currently, as well as any future possibilities as the State moves forward.

Image credit: No Votes for Genocide logo with petition count (taken from the petition website: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/no-votes-for-genocide). Created by Renee Johnston

Public Square Amplified: Can you describe this movement? The position and policies?

Manicastri: This is an anti-genocide movement aimed at using what remains of our electoral leverage to force the Biden administration to give us an arms embargo. Our pledge calls on signatories not to vote for Harris or any Congressional Dems without an arms embargo delivered before Nov. 5th.

Public Square Amplified: We understand No Votes for Genocide emerged as a response to the national Uncommitted’s announcement to "not endorse" but to not come out against Harris. What went into the decision to move forward with a new tactic?

Manicastri: No Votes for Genocide actually came about earlier than that announcement from national Uncommitted. We launched formally on September 1st. That said, Uncommitted’s strategy at the DNC did play a role in the formation of this campaign. I acted as a state delegate captain here in NJ, whipping ceasefire delegates leading up to the DNC in adherence with the national DNC strategy, as did others who are now helping to run swing state NVFG campaigns in collaboration with us. Once it became clear about a week in advance that Uncommitted national would not have enough signatures nationally to pose a formal arms embargo question at the DNC, many of us inquired about how national Uncommitted intended to escalate or pivot. We were met with the reality that the national Uncommitted strategy was not one that we as organizers had any real input on. When their DNC strategy failed and ultimately became reduced to getting Ruwa Romman on the DNC stage, many of us realized we needed to break from national Uncommitted and choose a different route. Liberal media is especially infamous for co-opting social movements, and it became immediately clear that the pivot to calling for a Palestinian speaker to take the stage was a perfect red herring for neither the party nor the media to contend with the reason we were there in the first place– an arms embargo. 

The Uncommitted primary movement was a threat that 700,000 voters nationwide made good on. They defected from voting Biden in protest of the administration’s policy on Gaza. Withholding votes from Harris in the general election is to us, the most logical continuation of the electoral strategy many of us employed in the primary. 

Public Square Amplified: Are you connected to any national movements?

Manicastri: We’ve made connections with CAIR Action, Abandon Harris, and campaigns in  swing states. We are also connected to voteforpeace.info which is linked on our website as a resource for signatories to find pro-peace candidates in their area. 

Public Square Amplified: What is the future goal for No Votes for Genocide? Is there an intention to continue organizing work beyond election day?

Manicastri: We are intending to continue organizing. We are still working out the kinks of what that looks like given that this is a coalitional movement. Unfortunately, having a plan for what comes next is no small feat but we are doing all we can to prepare. What we ultimately plan to do is also going to have to adapt to the outcome of the election. The goal, however, remains the same regardless of who wins. We want an end to the genocide.

Public Square Amplified: If the answer to the previous question is no, why not? If yes, what strategies are you working on?

Manicastri: Many of us are in alignment that next steps involve direct economic action either through the labor movement or through a robust BDS campaign. We believe we have very little leverage in this country. Once this election passes, we will have exhausted electoral measures. Our remaining leverage lies in our positionality as workers and consumers. 

Public Square Amplified: Has No Votes for Genocide been working with the AbandonHarris movement toward this effort? Are there plans to do any joint actions leading up to election day?

Manicastri: We have been in touch with Abandon Harris. One of our fellow organizers, Francesca Maria, recently did an interview with Dr. Hassan, co-founder of Abandon Biden, now Abandon Harris. They have taken a bit of a different strategy than us in explicitly endorsing the Green Party long in advance of the election, but we know our goals are aligned and that we must all work in coalition if we have any hopes of stopping the genocide. We are hopeful we’ll be able to continue collaborating with them and other groups after the election.  

Public Square Amplified: What has the response to the No Votes for Genocide petition been? Is this an action that has included speaking directly to voters? If so, what has the experience organizing that effort in NJ been like?

Manicastri: Many voters have responded to it positively, but it’s fair to say we’ve spent most of our time talking to the Palestinian/Muslim community in NJ, many of whom support the campaign or are intending to vote Green. Outside of those communities, the response has been mixed. That’s true outside of NJ as well. We have comrades canvassing for NVFG in Rhode Island, California, Texas and many other states and we’ve heard similar responses from those who don’t support us like: What about Trump? We can push Harris to a different stance after the election. There are other issues on the ballot besides Gaza.

Public Square Amplified: As an organizer, you all are engaged with other organizations and communities, what responses are you getting from your comrades regarding the decision to move forward with this campaign?

Manicastri: Many of the organizers in this campaign are active DSA members, and there has certainly been a very mixed and contentious response to this campaign within DSA, especially since our National Political Committee voted against adopting a national NVFG resolution. Most of the response we’ve gotten from those in opposition to our campaign has been about concerns for organizing conditions worsening under Trump, to which we’ve often pointed to the Democratic Party’s use of state violence against Black Lives Matter protestors in 2020 (hi Tim Walz), in the Stop Cop City movement in Atlanta, and in the past year against pro-Palestine organizers and protestors. The reality is that if we can agree that both parties serve the interests of capital, there is little argument to be made about whether one party will be more or less likely to protect those capital interests by squashing protest.

Public Square Amplified: How can people support you moving into these last few days before the election and beyond?

Manicastri: If you haven’t signed the pledge, please do. Check out our website to find pro-peace candidates in your area. Use our relational toolkit to have conversations about this campaign with the people you know. Be loud. Don’t stop talking about Palestine, don’t stop connecting American imperialism back to what we label as “domestic” issues. Attend an action near you. We’ll be supporting the Nov. 2nd PYM action in New York, and our collaborators are supporting other such actions nationwide. And more than anything, if you’ve gone through this past year hoping for something to change, wanting to help, please consider funneling those individual efforts into a collective space. Join an organization that is going to remain dedicated to fighting for a free Palestine.

Public Square Amplified: How do you respond to Democrats and Republicans, and even Independents that this movement has no possibility of winning, so why should they bother?

Manicastri: A couple things. I always find it funny when people say they support the idea but then claim pragmatism as the reason they won’t actually support it. Campaigns are only winnable if people choose to believe in them, engage in them, and organize around them. If those of us on the left had coalesced around a strategy like NVFG from the beginning, as we hoped would happen with national Uncommitted, the odds of us winning would likely be different than they are today. Sometimes our defeatist approach to organizing is truly our biggest obstacle. Secondly, regardless of your party affiliation, if you want to see an arms embargo and an end to the genocide in Gaza, adhering to those principles matters. Part of why our government is getting away with this genocide is because they are counting on us not to care. If you care, you need to show them that. Voting is one way to do it. If we have a significant portion of voters divest from the two party system this election cycle, enough to potentially sway a margin, then we have more leverage with which to make them listen to us. The callousness of Democrats on this issue especially points to their belief that the anti-genocide contingent is insignificant. We know we aren’t getting an arms embargo before election day, and in that sense, this campaign was a structure test and it showed us what we would need in order to win. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t stand in solidarity with Palestine or help prove to our government that we care about whether they commit genocide with our tax dollars.

Public Square Amplified: More so, Democrats are presenting this movement as a clear support of the Republican party–how do you respond?

Manicastri: Obfuscating the intentions of resistance movements is an old trick; Democrats will always position anyone in opposition to them as helping the Republican Party. The reality is that we are not Republicans. We are a multiracial coalition of working class voters across the country who refuse to accept genocide as a necessary part of the Democrats’ win condition. If you are a Democrat who has spent much of this election season chastising third party or leave-it-blank voters, I’d ask you why you didn’t spend that energy on getting your candidate to secure the one policy change that would almost undoubtedly guarantee her victory in this election. The precariousness many Dem voters currently feel and any potential losses incurred by the Democrats on Nov. 5th are the result of their commitment to genocide, and frankly, the complacency of every Democratic voter who refused to push their candidate toward a humanitarian position.

Photo credit: Renee Johnston

Votes are still being counted, but early results indicate a significantly lower voter turnout both nationally, and in the state of New Jersey. This could be, in part, due to the national efforts of the No Votes for Genocide movement. However, it would be difficult to confirm the correlation. In this state, the 3,000 signatories of the petition account for about half of 1% of the differential from the last presidential election cycle. Some will say it was insignificant. However, for the organizers, this is just the beginning.