The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersGilad Atzmon Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter

There is a growing debate in the USA about Critical Race Theory (CRT). Peculiarly enough, CRT’s opponents insist that the ‘Marxist’ discourse must be uprooted from American culture and the education system. I am puzzled by it, as I cannot think of anything more removed from Marx’s thinking than CRT.

Marx offered an economic analysis based on class division. For Marx, those at the bottom of the class stratum were destined to unite regardless of their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Marx as such was race-blind. However, his vision was unifying as far as at least the working class are concerned. But Critical Race Theory aims in the complete opposite direction. CRT’s advocates believe that people are and should be defined politically by their biology: by their skin colour, often by their gender and/or sexual orientation. CRT attempts to fight racism, not by eliminating it but actually elevating biological determinism into a constant battleground.

Critical race theorists aren’t too original on that biological determinist front. Already in the late 19th century, Zionism called the Jews to identify politically with their biology. Hitler’s call for the Aryan people to do the same happened about two decades later. Ironically, even the so-called Jewish ‘anti’ racists within the ‘Jews only’ anti-Zionist political cells (such as JVP, JVL, IJAN) follow the exact Zionist and Hitlerian agenda. They also insist on identifying politically and ideologically as ‘a race.’*

One may wonder at this stage why people within the conservative right refer to CRT as ‘Marxist’ despite it having nothing to do with Marx and having much to do (ideologically) with Zionism and Hitlerian biologism. One option is that people within the American Right believe that the reference to Marx communicates well with their supporting crowd. Another slightly less genuine option is that Marx is a code name for a ‘subversive Jew-related discourse.’ The American conservative universe is largely inspired by Israeli nationalism, however it is disgusted by Soros-type cosmopolitan interventionism. The American Right may be using codified language to tackle its own paralysis. It clearly struggles to call a spade a spade.

Considering the above it is fascinating to examine the Jewish American take on the CRT debate.

Last month Jewish Historian Henry Abramson used the Jewish Telegraphic Agency platform to inform us that “anyone teaching the past by skipping over the unpleasant parts isn’t teaching history. They are engaged in propaganda.” This firm statement took me by surprise. Like Abramson I oppose all forms of memory laws that restrict the free historical discussion. Yet, Jewish institutions are invested heavily in policing the historical debate. They often castigate as Holocaust Deniers everyone who dares to question the primacy of Jewish suffering or even offer a slightly unorthodox vision of WWII. The Jewish intellectual tradition isn’t famous for its list of historical texts either, quite the opposite. There is a complete lack of Judaic historical texts in between Flavius Josephus (AD37-AD100) and Heinrich Graetz (1817-1891). The rabbinical universe has tended to skip the historical tradition because the Talmud and Torah are there to determine the manner in which Jews react to the universe around them. Israeli historian Shlomo Sand has pointed out that the Jews and Zionists in particular largely invent their past to fit with their political, existential, and spiritual interests. Maybe it shouldn’t be down to Jewish institutions to preach how to discuss the past.

Abramson is upset by the fact that in “nearly two dozen states, the movement to impose restrictions on the teaching of history is gaining momentum.” Abramson is also upset by the new Polish memory law and Putin dictating a vision of the Holodomor. Maybe before I delve into Abramson’s concern, I should mention that using Google search, I didn’t manage to find any opposition made by Abramson to the Israeli Nakba Law that similarly restricts the discussion on the Israeli 1948 ethnic cleansing crime.

Abramson claims that opponents of CRT attempt to avoid the discussion over the “controversial and painful moments in America’s history.” I am not sure that this is the case. I am not sure that America can or even intends to deny its problematic abusive past, but I do know that every black academic who attempted to discuss the role of Jews in the African slave trade has witnessed hell breaking loose. I highly recommend Abramson and everyone else read Prof. Tony Martin’s spectacular The Jewish Onslaught , a reportage of an orchestrated and abusive Jewish institutional campaign against a Black scholar who didn’t follow the script and tried to examine what was the role of some Jews in the African Slave Trade.

For Abramson and others, CRT is a study of the impact of systemic racism. It is the adherence to the belief “that the legacy of slavery is baked into American society and culture to such a degree that African-Americans continue to suffer long-term, systemic economic harm.” It suggests that discussing reparations should be on the national agenda.

The truth of the matter is that many of those who oppose CRT would agree with Abramson that racism is alive and kicking in the USA. A few may even suggest using America’s aid to Israel as reparation for the black slavery’s offspring. Would the JTA, AIPAC or Abramson join such a call for overdue justice? I doubt it.

The JTA insists to give the impression that Jews and Blacks are both share a similar marginalized past. Abramson writes: “Blacks were, like Jews, forbidden to buy homes in newly developed suburbs, while white Americans received help from the government to purchase homes in these leafy neighborhoods and to build generational wealth.” Yet, there is one difference our Jewish ‘historian’ forgets to mention: Jews immigrated to America voluntarily. For them, America was a ‘Golden Medina’ (Golden Land), the true promised land of free opportunities and ultimate capitalism. Blacks, on the other hand, made their way to the ‘land of the free’ chained in salve ships. Jews came to America in their search for better life, they faced obstacles but prevailed, and are now amongst the most privileged ethnic groups in the USA, if not the most privileged. Blacks were brought over to be exploited as slave labour. They had a very different beginning in the USA. The attempt to compare between the two is intellectually dishonest to say the least, but it may come to serve a purpose.

A decade ago in a rare moment of honesty, Philip Weiss, the dominant contributor to the Jewish pro-Palestinian outlet Mondoweiss, admitted to me in an interview that it wasn’t altruism that motivated his pro-Palestinian stand. It was “Jewish self-interest.” I learned a lot from this encounter with the Jewish activist and since then I have been very suspicious of Jewish solidarity projects. I somehow always see the self-interest popping out at one stage or another.

Jewish institutions and individuals have been involved in most solidarity projects in the last century. They insist to save the working class, to universalize civil rights, to liberate women and gays, and of course the transsexual. The outcome has never been too good. Instead of marching society forward as a whole, we ended up with an amalgam of conflicts that practically resembles the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

 

Stanford University study reveals: “Some 80% of (Jews of colour) respondents said that they had ‘experienced discrimination’ within Jewish settings, including synagogues, congregations, and Jewish spiritual communities.”

People who are familiar with the history of Zionism are aware of the rich history of White Jewish (AKA Ashkenazi) abuse towards Arab and Sephardi Jews in Israel. In the years after the creation of the Israeli state hundreds of babies went missing. Their parents, mostly Jewish immigrants from Yemen, were told their children had died, but suspicions linger that they were secretly given away to White Jewish childless families. The Israeli government approved earlier this year a NIS162 million settlement with the families of these ‘vanishing’ children.

Volunteering the Israeli population as guinea pigs wasn’t invented by Netanyahu or/and Pfizer. Blood samples drawn from Yemenites Jews in the 1950s were tested to determine whether they had “Negro blood.” According to the Times of Israel “60 hearts were harvested from the bodies of new immigrants from Yemen post-mortem for purposes of medical research, in a project purportedly funded by the US.” Also in the same period, the Jewish state irradiated children who arrived from North Africa and the Middle East en masse in an attempt to fight ringworm. In the years to follow many of these children died from cancer. In 1995 the Israeli government decided to compensate the victims and families of the Ringworm Affair.

In the late 1950-1960s Jewish immigrants from Morocco were sprayed with DDT as soon as their feet touched the ‘promised land.’ For them, this bitter departure was merely an introduction to decades of abuse and humiliation that is still taking place.

It took the Israeli Government more than a few decades to lift its 1977 ban preventing Jews from Ethiopia donating blood. This late immigration wave of African Jews sent their children to serve in the army and to die for Israel but apparently their blood wasn’t as good as their fellow Israelis.

The Yemenites, Moroccans and Ethiopians have something in common. They are ‘Jews of colour,’ not exactly the most privileged Jews in Israel. Just slightly above the Palestinians and the African non-Jewish immigrants. Some anti-Zionists may insist that this is exactly what we should expect from a racist criminal State. However, the fate of American Jews of colour isn’t any better, in fact it is far worse.

The Jerusalem Post reported yesterday on a study conducted by researchers at Stanford University that delved into the experiences of American Jews of Color. The new report titled Beyond the Count revealed large and systemic discrimination and scrutinization based on race in the Jewish Society.

The data was gathered at Stanford University by a multi-racial team of researchers, with over 1,118 respondents participating. It revealed that “Some 80% of respondents said that they had ‘experienced discrimination’ within Jewish settings, including synagogues, congregations, and Jewish spiritual communities.”

“Additionally, respondents indicated that they had previously experienced an increased sense of awareness regarding how others perceive them because of either their race or their Jewishness.” Some participants admitted they found it “more difficult for their identities to co-exist in predominantly white Jewish spaces than in Black indigenous people of color spaces.” Furthermore, 44% said they had changed how they dress or speak in white Jewish spaces, and 66% reported feeling “disconnected from their Jewish identities at times.”

I wouldn’t dare to ask Jews or anyone else to morph, to become more tolerant or harmonious, as that is not my task in life. I wouldn’t expect anyone who upholds racist and/or white supremacist views to change their spots. I just expect Jews in general and Jewish institutions (such as the ADL or AIPAC) in particular, to look in the mirror twice before they preach to us about ‘race’ in general or white privilege in particular.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, History, Ideology • Tags: Discrimination, Israel, Jews 

Does it take a genius to gather that the colossal failure of the USA’s war in Afghanistan is identical to the disastrous ‘war against COVID’? It’s certainly clear that it is pretty much the same people who devised the fatal strategies that led to a grandiose defeat in these two unnecessary conflicts. We deal with people who adhere to the concept of war of destruction. These are people who do not seek peace, harmony or reconciliation neither with nature nor with other segments of humanity.

Our pandemic ‘strategists’ believed that it was within their powers to wipe SARS CoV 2 from the face of the earth. They were similarly convinced that the Taliban could be eradicated. They were, obviously, catastrophically wrong.

But the progressives and the so-called Left also have an unforgivable part in these catastrophic tales. The Left weren’t responsible for the ‘strategies’ or the grand planning. They weren’t really participants in the neoconservative think tanks, they weren’t involved in Pfizer’s promise to fix the human genome. They weren’t advising Netanyahu, Trump or Johnson’s in 2020 as they weren’t amongst Bush’s advisers back in 2001. But they were the first to support the Ziocon ‘War Against Terror,’ mostly in the name of ‘moral interventionism.’ Similarly, they have been amongst the most enthusiastic supporters of the current experiment in mass human population.

One doesn’t need to scratch the surface to notice that that the Jewish State also had a central role in these two humongous blunders. The neocon think tanks that pushed America to Afghanistan were of course made of ardent Jewish Zionists. Back in 2003 Ari Shavit wrote in Haaretz “The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history.” The people who volunteered themselves as the guinea pigs in Pfizer’s COVID experiment where of course the Israelis. Netanyahu’s Israel didn’t attempt to “live with COVID,” it instead treated the virus as a contemporary Amalek, an anti-Semitic plague that must be eradicated: the Mossad together with the IDF joined forces in the war against Covid. When it seemed as if number of COVID cases were going down, Israel was fast to declare a victory in the war against the virus.

 

But the reality is embarrassing. In Afghanistan the Taliban is stronger than ever. America left the country it promised to ‘liberate’ with its tail between its legs. In the fight against COVID, America is equally defeated. In the USA, a CDC study found vaccinated people made up 74% of cases in a beach town outbreak in Massachusetts. And In Israel, Delta has made a spectacularly successful aliya. The vaccinated are now overrepresented amongst Delta cases and equally represented amongst critical cases. A few days ago an Israeli hospital director admitted that 90% of his patients are vaccinated. “The vaccine is waning in front of our eyes,” he said.

The modernist 19th century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz defined war as “the continuation of politics by other means.” But in the global Zionised universe in which we live, politics is merely the continuation of war. Keeping the world in a conflict is the current global mantra as people are submissive when fearful. This philosophy has sustained Zionism for decades. It kept the Jewish people united for two millennia but it came with a price. Jewish history isn’t exactly a story of tranquility.

It shouldn’t really be me who reminds my fellow peace loving brothers and sisters that loving one’s neighbor may as well mean seeking peace and harmony with the universe as a whole (viruses included).

 
Julianne Romanello & Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Jason Bosch

In this extended discussion Julianne Romanello and myself together with Jason Bosch delve into the ideological and spiritual thoughts that have turned our world into an open air prison. We looked into the work of Leo Strauss, Athens & Jerusalem, Noahide fundamentals, the origin of Zionism and many other crucial topics most intellectuals insist to avoid…

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Philosophy, Zionism 

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid spoke on Wednesday at the seventh Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism. He said that antisemitism was part of a broad family of hatreds, and that antisemites start by attacking Jews but “always” move on to focus their hate and violence on other groups as well.

Lapid insisted that antisemitism was akin to other hatreds, such as ones held by those “who participated in the slave trade.” Presumably the ignoramus isn’t aware that some historians assert that there were Jews prominent in the African slave trade. Lapid also pointed at the “Hutu massacres of Tutsis in Rwanda.” Someone should mention to him that the 1948 Palestinian Nakba was launched with a manifold of Jewish paramilitary massacres of indigenous people. These horrendous actions led to an orchestrated ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

Lapid maintained that “Antisemitism isn’t the first name of hate, it’s the family name.” I would advise the Israeli foreign minister that if racism is the appropriate family name for most forms of bigotry towards the Other, then chosenness (racial supremacy) should be considered its definitive first name.

If you allowed yourself for a second to believe that Lapid was motivated by a genuine humanist and a universalist agenda to fight racism and hatred, you were obviously wrong. Lapid devised a plan for the goyim: “Jewish people need allies and to enlist everyone who believes it is wrong to persecute people just because of their faith, sexuality, gender, nationality, or the colour of their skin…We need to tell them that antisemitism never ends with the Jews. It will always move on to the next target.”

According to Lapid, the survival of the Jewish nationalist project is dependent on the of the breaking up of the universe into identarian segments, while making sure they all adhere to the Jewish state and the Jewish people’s interests. While the old Jewish Left pushed for a cosmopolitan agenda that removed barriers and borders between people regardless of their race, gender or nationality, the new Jewish progressive agenda is the complete opposite. It is there to divide us by means of gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, race, etc. We are basically witnessing a globalized version of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

Lapid reckons that “the fight isn’t between antisemites and Jews: The fight is between antisemites and anyone who believes in the values of equality, justice and liberty.” But the truth of the matter is that not many states in the world are as removed from ‘values of equality, justice and liberty’ as the Jewish state. Look how Israel treats its African asylum seekers or the black Hebrews. Can you think of any other state that locks millions of people in open air prisons for decades and make them subject to endless brutal blockades?

Many in Israel didn’t approve of Lapid’s speech. Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu has accused the Foreign Minister of “minimizing” the concept of antisemitism and diminishing its uniqueness. Lapid was basically accused of trivializing the Holocaust. He isn’t the first; the ADL accuses yours truly of pretty much the same ‘crime.’

“Even though antisemitism, hatred of Jews, is part of the general human phenomenon of hatred of the foreigner, it is different from that in its strength, its durability over thousands of years and its murderous ideology that has been nourished throughout the generations in order to pave the way for the destruction of Jews.” Netanyahu argued. For a change, I agree with Netanyahu. Jewish history is indeed a chain of catastrophes. Jews have been experiencing rejection and abuse throughout their entire history.

Early Zionism, as such, was indeed a unique and refreshing movement that was destined to change the Jewish path and destiny. It vowed to ‘amend’ the Jews, to make them beloved and respected. No one understood this revolutionary intellectual and spiritual shift in the Jewish mindset better than Benjamin Netanyahu’s father, who wrote what I believe to be one of the best historical dissections of the Early Zionist project. But the truth on the ground and the rise of antisemitsm are probably the best indication that Zionism failed catastrophically. Over time, it is clear that Zionism achieved the complete opposite.

If there are any true Zionist thinkers left in the Jewish world, they should look in the mirror and ask what Israel does to provoke antisemitism. What is it that Jewish lobby groups do that alienate so many people? Such an approach may prove to be more helpful on the long run than Lapid’s tactical offering to make identitarians worldwide into a new league of Zionist mercenaries.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Anti-Semitism, Israel, Israel/Palestine 

On July 9, we learned that Pfizer planned to ask U.S. and European regulators to authorize an urgent booster dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, “based on evidence of greater risk of infection six months after inoculation and the spread of the highly contagious Delta variant.”

On the same day we also learned that the FDA and CDC weren’t very enthusiastic about the idea. In a joint statement both institutions announced that “Americans who have been fully vaccinated do not need a booster COVID-19 shot at this time.”

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) also said that “it was too early to determine whether more than the two shots that are currently required would be called for, saying it was confident for now that the established regimen was sufficient.”

It was revealed later that day that Pfizer’s emergency booster request was initiated following some catastrophic data from Israel.

Searching for a clue in Hebrew media sources, I came across a spectacular revelation dated 6 July that showed around 85% of new COVID Delta infections in Israel are fully vaccinated.

The above data suggests that while in the youngest age group (20-29) the vaccinated were about 2.3 over-represented amongst COVID infection cases. In some of the older age group (50-59 for instance), the vaccinated were overrepresented by even more than 15-fold. We should take into consideration that in Israel most senior citizens are fully vaccinated. And yet, since in Israel only 57% of the population is fully vaccinated, one would expect the balance between Delta cases in Israel to be shared by a rate that doesn’t exceed beyond a 6:4 ratio between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.  Clearly this is not the case. On average, according to the data above the vaccinated are more likely to catch delta by a ratio of 5:1 on average.

Being slightly suspicious of the above data and its origin, I asked my Israeli partners to trace an official government document that could confirm the above numbers. Within a few minutes the Israeli Health Ministry announcement for July 6  surfaced in my email inbox and it validates the above finding.

The most significant information is produced by the following table.

The above study reveals that while in February 2020 (31/1-27/2) the unvaccinated dominated the COVID cases by a ratio of 20:1, six months later in June 2020 (6/6-3/7) it is actually the vaccinated who are prone to be infected by a ratio of 5:1. It is the vaccinated who happen to develop symptoms by a ratio of 5:1. It is the vaccinated who are more likely to be hospitalized and develop critical illness. If Israel was a ‘world experiment,’ as Benjamin Netanyahu presented it at one stage, this experiment is now turning into a disaster (at least for the vaccinated). In Israel, the vaccinated are becoming infected at a growing rate and as such are spreading the virus rather than stopping it. We also have a good reason to believe that the rest of the Western world will witness a similar pattern as it has followed the Israeli vaccine doctrine.

People like to fiddle with statistics and draw the conclusions that suit them. If only 11 out of the 1271 vaccinated cases develop critical illness, we are dealing with slightly less than 1% of the vaccinated developing critical illness. At the same time more than 2% of the unvaccinated develop critical illness. Yet, since Delta cases are 5 times more common amongst the vaccinated as time passes by, I may suggest that we are facing a possible emerging disaster as far as the Pfizer-vaccinated are concerned.

I guess that Pfizer scientists understand all of this very well and this is why they asked for an immediate booster approval.

 

Israel seems upset by a new Polish law that sets a 30-year deadline for Jews to recover seized property. The legislation is yet to be approved by Poland’s senate, yet Israeli officials already refer to it as the “Holocaust law.” They insist that it is ‘immoral’ and ‘a disgrace.’

Last week Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Yair Lapid insisted that the bill “is a disgrace that will not erase the horrors or the memory of the Holocaust.”

I fail to see which part of the legislation interferes with the memory and the horrors of the holocaust. I actually think that the crude attempt to squeeze billions of dollars from Poland in the name of a human tragedy may have a detrimental impact on this historical chapter and the way it is memorized.

The Poles didn’t approve of the Jewish ‘State’ interfering with their internal affairs. On Friday, Poland’s Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki hit back at Lapid, stressing, “I can only say that as long as I am the prime minister, Poland will not pay for German crimes: Neither zloty, nor euro, nor dollar.”

Poland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs echoed Morawiecki’s position, arguing that Lapid’s comments were misguided. “Poland is by no means responsible for the Holocaust, an atrocity committed by the German occupant also on Polish citizens of Jewish origin.”

During the weekend, the crisis seemed to escalate. On Sunday, Poland and Israel summoned the other’s ambassador for meetings as the rift between the two countries didn’t seem to subside.

I am not in a position to judge what is right and who is wrong on restitution matters. Suppose the Polish new legislation is “a horrific injustice and disgrace that harms the rights of Holocaust survivors and their heirs,” as Lapid says. In that case, we should also expect Lapid to vividly support the Palestinians, their right of return, and their right to be compensated for the colossal crimes committed against them in 1948 and thereafter.

In 1948, more than 700,000 Palestinians (the vast majority of indigenous Palestine) were ethnically cleansed by the newly born Jewish State. This catastrophic racially driven crime (that included a long list of massacres) is called the Nakba. It took place less than four years after the liberation of Auschwitz.

During the 1948 war and shortly after, young Israel wiped out Palestinian cities and villages. It then used legislation to prevent Palestinians from returning to their homes and applied any possible means to plunder their properties, dispossessing those few Palestinians who clung to their land. Yet, Israel never admitted its original sin of ethnic cleansing.

Applying to a moral cause, Israel claims to represent Jewish demands for restitution in Poland. I wonder, shouldn’t the same rule be applied to the Palestinians? Shouldn’t Israel put the same moral law into play and acknowledge the Palestinians’ right to their land, villages, cities, fields, and orchards?

While in Poland, it was Nazi Germany that brought a disaster on the county’s Jewry. In Palestine, young IDF and Jewish paramilitary groups committed colossal crimes against the indigenous population. While Nazi Germany ceased to exist in 1945, the IDF is still with us. The Labour party (which formed the first Israeli government directly) is still active and is even a member of the current governing coalition. The Likud Party, being the offspring of the Irgun and the Stern Gang (both complicit in some of the most brutal massacres in Palestine), is, by far, the biggest party in the Israeli Knesset. The Israeli and Zionist institutions that were responsible for the 1948 crime have never ceased to exist. They have never owned their crimes, let alone repented.

Holocaust survivors have been compensated by different means for the crime that was committed against them by Europeans. Israel benefitted from a large reparations deal with the German government. The Palestinians, however, are still living in open-air prisons and refugee camps, subject to blockades and constant abuse.

The time is ripe for Israel to own up to its horrendous past. By now, Israel should accept that the Palestinian cause is not fading away or evaporating into thin air. If Israel seeks to reconcile with the region, it must first apply to itself that moral code that it demands Poland to follow.

 

Ten Days ago the The Palestinian Authority rejected 90,000 vaccine doses from Israel because they were ‘almost expired.’ Earlier that day, Israel announced that it would transfer up to 1.4 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine to the Palestinian territory. But almost as soon as the first 90,000 doses arrived to Ramallah, the PA said it would send them back as they were about to become dated.

But Israel didn’t give up. It may have found an easier customer for its nearly expired vaccines.

The Israeli News 12 revealed today that an “advanced negotiation between Israel and the UK on a vaccine exchange deal” is taking place.

The N12 news item reveals that “the (Israeli) Ministry of Health fears the loss of hundreds of thousands of doses has devised a creative solution. Britain may receive a million vaccines as early as next week, and in return – will deliver to Israel the next shipment it receives from Pfizer in September.” The Israeli news item also points out that the Israeli Pfizer doses will expire as soon as next Saturday.

If you wonder why Israel is in such a panic situation regarding its left over vaccines, the following graph of Israeli vaccine distribution may provide the answer.

The graph reveals that since late March Israelis have lost interest in vaccination. About 40% of the Israelis are not vaccinated and do not show any signs of enthusiasm about inoculation. The graph also reveals that a solid 4% of the Israelis who took the first Pfizer dose were reluctant to take the second one. This may be due to the Israeli growing awareness of severe adverse reactions to the vaccines as well as the intense work of brave Israeli dissenters.

One may wonder, however, who in the British government is negotiating this kind of a ‘deal’ and who exactly in the NHS is going to vaccinate Brits with doses that were rejected by the Palestinian authority due to their expiration date.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Britain, Coronavirus, Israel/Palestine, Vaccines 

I am slightly amused by the many voices who celebrate what is perceived as the end of the Netanyahu era. Of course, I am not a Netanyahu supporter, far from it, but I will give Netanyahu credit where he deserves it. ‘King Bibi,’ as his Jewish supporters often refer to him, was actually a crucial factor in the rise of Palestinian resistance and Palestinian unity. Bibi was a pragmatist who managed to pull his nation, the region and even the entire world into a chain of disasters in a desperate but relentless attempt to save himself. Bibi is not a conspirator. He did it all in the open, and despite this, he is still the most popular politician in Israel.

As I have pointed out many times before, Israel is not politically divided. The vast majority of Israeli Knesset Members (MKs) are to the right of Netanyahu. Israel’s political establishment is divided over Netanyahu, but primarily due to personal rifts.

Israel is now governed by a very weak coalition unlikely to hold together for very long. One minor border clash in Gaza or a Jewish right-wing march in Jerusalem could topple the government and bring to an end to the ‘spirit of change’ in Israel. Since the current government enjoys a majority of just one Knesset member, every member in the coalition possesses the power to topple the government, or alternatively to mount significant pressure on the leader. The Government is practically paralyzed.

But the issue is far deeper. Netanyahu’s potential disappearance (be it through retirement from politics or shelter from his legal issues in a friendly country) will see the immediate collapse of the current coalition in favour of an ultra-right government. Such a government would enjoy the support of at least 80 Knesset members. It would include whatever is left out of the Likud party, the rabbinical Orthodox parties and of course around 20-25 of Netanyahu’s right-wing rivals who happened to end up (momentarily) in the so called ‘change coalition’.

In the complicated political stalemate that emerged due to the unresolved tension between Netanyahu and his rivals within the Right (such as Naftali Bennett, Gideon Sa’ar and Avigdor Lieberman), the Islamist party and its leader Mansur Abbas became kingmakers. On the face of it, the success of Abbas could bring many more Israeli Arabs to the polls. If Arabs in Israel see a benefit in their political participation and decide to go to the polls at a similar rate to their Jewish counterparts, they could almost double their representation in the Knesset. Israeli Arabs could easily become the most significant political bloc in the Jewish State. Yet Netanyahu’s disappearance would lead a shift in the complete opposite direction. With a right-wing Jewish coalition comprised of 80 MKs, no one would be dependent on the support of Ra’am or any Arab party.

What are the chances of Netanyahu disappearing? It depends how his trial evolves. But despite some calls to replace him within the Likud party, every grassroots Likud activist knows that Likud’s future and its electoral survival are totally dependent on Netanyahu and his charisma. Not only did he fail to prepare a successor, he worked tirelessly to undermine every gifted politician around him. He turned every rising right-wing alternative into his bitter enemy, and to a certain extent owes himself his own demise.

Unlike the naïve voices who speak for Palestine in the West but hardly understand the region and are too scared to ask what is it that drives the Jewish State, Hamas’ strategists see it all. They helped Bibi stay in power: he let them win, they let him paralyze Israel and let it spiral down. I also believe that Mansour Abbas can read the map. He knows that the Israeli Left is a comical compromised act. He knows that Meretz and the Labour party have removed themselves from the conflict and are solely concerned with climate issues and Identitarian matters (LGBTQ in particular). Mansour Abbas made a strategic effort to bond with the Jewish right wing, to form a coalition with the Orthodox parties. Bibi was happy to take Abbas into his coalition but Abbas failed to achieve his goal because the ultra-right Jewish parties identified his strategy and worked hard to undermine it.

I would have thought that in light of the above, those who wish for one state between the River and the Sea should consider accepting that Bibi may be the safest and fastest route towards such a goal.

 

A few days ago, Ynet (the biggest Israeli media outlet) reported that the American progressive movement has come to acknowledge the problematic role of its Jewish elements. The Israeli outlet revealed that in the eyes of emerging progressive circles within the American left, Jews are perceived as “white oppressors” at the core of America’s social injustice. The Ynet report is based on a recent study made by Dafna Kaufman, an analyst at the Israeli Reut institute.

“The contemporary discourse of the American left divides society into (identitarian) squares: you are either with us or against us – and the Jews are left out.” Ynet sums up Kaufman’s argument. “Although the vast majority of American Jews support the Democratic Party, progressive circles no longer really allow Jews to be part of the struggle for social change, as long as they continue to be pro-Zionist and actively express their Jewishness.” You may have already noticed that the Israeli outlet doesn’t refer solely to ‘Zionists’ as most Palestinian solidarity campaigners do out of fear of the ‘Jews in their movement.’ The Israeli news outlet refers to ‘Jews,’ ‘Jewishness’ and also to ‘Zionists’ as an integral organic spectrum of Jewish life, culture, identity and politics.

Ynet stresses that the American Left has developed an intolerance towards Jewish politics and Jewish identitarianism. “The report further indicates that the radical progressive faction contributes to the growing exclusion of Jewish community organizations from the American left by denying Jews the right to complain about their discrimination or anti-Semitism.” Ynet quotes Kaufman’s report, “Jews are being identified as strong white oppressors, and so is the State of Israel.”

Ynet asks, ‘can I be white, Jewish, liberal and Democrat?’ Kaufman answers “Of course you can be, but some of your rights are pretty much revoked. You can be an ally in social struggles, but you can’t be at the center of the issue.” I guess that what Kaufman is telling us here is that you can be a ‘Jew’ and a ‘Lefty’ but your role as controlled opposition might have come to an end.

Ynet stresses that “it is important to remember that Jews have made progress in American society through the establishment, and this is a significant part of the influence of Jews on the United States, yet the progressive movement is very anti-establishment. Therefore, the conclusion is clearly that the Jews are the oppressive white. Of course, the real picture is more complex, but this binary division puts the Jews in certain boxes.”

The above Israeli discourse reminds me of an old Israeli joke:

An Israeli arrives at Heathrow. The immigration officer asks “occupation?”

“No” replies the Israeli, “just visiting.”

In the joke, the Israeli sees himself as an occupier, and also accepts being perceived as one, but most significantly, he is totally at ease with his role as an occupier. The British immigration officer is obviously blind to all of that, as he is engaged in routine questioning. He might even miss the joke. In the American reality as depicted by Ynet’s article, the progressives are awakening to the reality that has been openly inflicted on their movement by some powerful and loud lobbies, well-funded think tanks and pressure groups.

The Jewish fear of anti-Semitism is exactly that moment of awakening, the tormenting thought that the immigration officer actually understands the joke and even allows himself to laugh loudly. This is exactly what the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan meant by ‘the unconscious is the discourse of the other.’ It is the fear that the other sees you for what you are and even dares to share his/her thoughts about you with everyone else. Accordingly, if Jewish power is the power to silence criticism of Jewish power, then the fear of anti-Semitism is the tormenting thought that this power wanes off: the thought about people starting to call a spade a spade and even worse: leftists sticking to their principles of equality and justice.

The other day, I asked a progressive member of my family to define history: “we learn about our past mistakes so we don’t repeat them in the future,” he cleverly said. I corrected him slightly. ‘We learn about our past mistakes so we can understand our future mistakes within context.’ Delving into this complexity from a psychoanalytical perspective brings to light the notion of ‘Repetition Compulsion.’ Repetition Compulsion is often defined as a psychological phenomenon in which a human subject repeats an event or its circumstances over and over again. This entails putting oneself in situations where the event is likely to happen again. The concept of repetition compulsion was first introduced by Freud who pointed at a situation in which “the patient does not remember anything of what he has forgotten and repressed, he acts it out, without, of course, knowing that he is repeating it …”

Yet, the Freudian concept fails to accurately describe the emerging dangerous circumstances as described by the Ynet article. As we know, self-identified Jews are fully aware of and actively identify with Jewish past suffering. But, for one reason or another, some people do not learn from their past mistakes. They keep repeating the same mistakes and expect different outcomes.

 
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...