What is intifada chant
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The phrase "intifada" is an Arabic word that literally means "a shaking off" and is generally translated as "uprising" or "resistance," but in modern discourse it carries layered, contested meanings because of its history in Palestinian uprisings and its recent use at global protests [1] [2] [3]. When chanted in slogans like "globalize the intifada," the phrase is heard by some as a call for solidarity and nonviolent liberation and by others as an endorsement or normalization of violence against Jews or Israel, a tension that has led to police action and political debate in the U.K., Australia and elsewhere [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. What the word literally and historically means
Linguistically, intifada comes from an Arabic root meaning "to shake off," and historically it has been used across the Middle East to describe uprisings; in Palestinian history it specifically names collective episodes of resistance—most prominently the First Intifada (1987–1993) and the Second Intifada (2000–2005)—which included both nonviolent mass protest and, especially in the second wave, episodes of lethal violence [1] [2]. Early usages emphasized "aggressive nonviolent resistance" and grassroots tactics such as strikes and boycotts, but history shows the term has encompassed a spectrum of tactics, from stone-throwing protests to suicide bombings and armed attacks during the Second Intifada, and thus carries different associative weight for different audiences [2] [8].
2. How the chant is used in contemporary protest
At pro-Palestinian demonstrations since October 2023, crowds have frequently chanted variations—“intifada,” “long live the intifada,” and “globalize the intifada”—as a rallying cry meant, according to many participants and organizers, to express solidarity with Palestinians and to call for a worldwide movement of resistance to Israeli policies [4] [9] [10]. Supporters and some commentators argue the slogan is intended to galvanize international political pressure and liberation discourse, not necessarily to endorse specific violent acts [9] [6].
3. Why the chant alarms others and prompts law-enforcement responses
For many Israelis, Jews and critics, the phrase evokes the violence of the Second Intifada and is therefore heard as a threat or incitement; that perception has intensified after high-profile attacks—most notably the Bondi Beach massacre in Australia—and has prompted police forces in London and Manchester to say they will arrest people chanting “globalize the intifada” or displaying related placards, citing changed security context and community fears [3] [5] [6]. Jewish organizations and some politicians argue that repeated public chants normalize violence and can create permissive conditions for real-world attacks [7] [10].
4. The dispute over meaning and free speech
Scholars, journalists and civil liberties advocates caution that the word’s ambiguity requires careful legal and political handling: some insist intifada remains a contested political term that can mean uprising, liberation or protest rather than explicit violent instruction, and warn that criminalizing a chant risks political repression of pro-Palestinian advocacy [1] [6] [11]. Opponents counter that context matters and that when chants coexist with other violent rhetoric or follow violent events, a neutral linguistic reading becomes implausible to those targeted [8] [12].
5. What reporting and institutions say — and what remains unsettled
Major media, police statements and advocacy groups document both uses: outlets note the etymology and historic nonviolent roots while also recounting the Second Intifada’s violent episodes and contemporary fears that chanting "intifada" can signal or incite violence, and police in several jurisdictions have acted on that concern [1] [2] [5] [13]. Reporting shows no single consensus: competing narratives reflect different experiences, traumas and political aims, and available sources do not resolve whether every utterance of the chant is an incitement to violence versus a political slogan for solidarity [4] [6].