Uri Avnery is against the boycott movement. As I mentioned above, he is also – and far more importantly, I would say – opposed to the Right of Return. This means that Avnery is, by definition and quite like the vast majority of Israelis, adamantly opposed to the idea that Israel must abide by international law. Why? Because Jews are special. Or in his quaint formulation above: “Peoples are not the same everywhere.” This sentiment, unfortunately, shares much in common with that of Rabbi Perrin, who famously announced that “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.”

Avnery has maintained that the Right of Return is unacceptable simply because Jews in Israel will not accept it. One has to wonder what kind of person would actually try to argue that the ambient racism of his country somehow magically exempts them from international law and universal standards of human rights. As if there were a right to be racist, and as if that imaginary Jewish right to be racist led to a de facto right to engage in cleansing, or a right to pursue genocide. There is not a right to be racist, just as there is no right of states to create and maintain racial demographics, or to confer political rights on one ethnic group while imposing racial subjugation on all others.

Apparently it must be reiterated that the problem is not international law or the universal tenets of human rights, but the racism of Jews who endorse zionism.

The law exists as an alternative to naked violence. To the extent that Israel refuses, decade after decade after decade, to abide by international law, Israel loses the right to object to the application of naked violence against it. The sanctions movement exists as a last-ditch attempt to legitimize Israel – to bring it into some even marginal compliance with universal norms of tolerable conduct.

I support the sanctions movement, but doubt that it will be sufficient to save Israel from it’s own fanatical race towards self-destruction. Why? Because, in the words of the omnipresent racist above, “The Zionist vision will not change.” The Zionism plan to seize and ethnically cleanse Palestine led, quite predictably, to the seizure of most of Palestine and the ethnic cleansing of 85% of the non-Jewish populaiton in 1948. This was a criminal, racist and entirely indefensible project then, and it remains so today, even as the criminal land seizure and ethnic cleansing have continued, day after day, over the 60 years since the establishemnt of Israel. This zionist vision will not change, and tribal fanatics around the world, as we can see from the squealing above, will continue to shriek and wail and go ballistic in order to defend that indefensible process until the last non-Jew within a thousand miles in any direction of Israel is dead. As long as Zionism continues to be tolerated as a moral, acceptable political ideology, this conflict will not end, and the animosities and grievances of every one of Israel’s neighbors will inevitably continue to grow.

There will come a point at which we will have to ask ourselves whether continuing to coddle the racial hysteria of this fanatical ultra-minority within a minority – less than one tenth of 1% of the human population – requires the complete paralysis of the entire planet’s political, moral and legal apparatus. Do the militant racist fantasies and real estate ambitions of 5 million Jews in Israel really merit this kind of international deference, particularly when we consider the immediate and corrosive effects these fanatical colonists have on the hundreds of millions of non-Jews who have the misfortune of living anywhere in the vicinity of this little ethnic cleansing machine?

People are free to think whatever disgusting genocidal racist bullshit they want. But people, like states, are not free to engage in ethnic cleansing, genocide, mass racial subjugation, or any of the other goals of the zionist project, withought facing political, legal and moral consequences.

I understand that Avnery has fought his whole life, without success, for a less overtly genocidal iteration of zionism. He does this, in large part, judging from his own statements, that Jews should be nicer because its good for the jews. This is just racism.

Avnery’s argument, which is basically the argument of that genre of zionism that likes to call itself “post-zionist, or left zionist, is that not only are Jews so special that they get to spray flesh-eating chemical weapons over some of the most densely populated cities on earth, where the average population is about 14; no, Jews are so VERY special that they should be able to do that, and worse, without anyone else on earth saying a peep about it. And if they do, well, they just don’t understand how special jews are.

What one experiences does dominate one’s perceptions.