Trending Topics:

We’re all Jewish Supremacists Now: Israeli politics, a guide for the perplexed

News
on 73 Comments

Israelis will go the polls on April 9th, in what I consider to be a good omen: It would be the 154th anniversary of Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House, and we certainly could use any victory over racism. The results as predicted this early in the campaign, however, are anything but hopeful.

The latest polls show Labor, the old liberal-Zionist central-left party, losing approximately 75% of its seats, standing now at 6-8 seats, and a gentle push may drive it under the Blocking Line of four seats, which means the party will lose all seats. Things look bleak for Meretz, the only party on the Jewish left. Usually, Meretz would gain at Labor’s loss, particularly as Labor took a right-wing path under its current feckless leader, Avi Gabai; but now Meretz, too, is hovering near the Blocking Line. It has five seats at the moment, was expected to make a modest gain to seven seats, but now the polls indicate it will gain four. A slight opposing wind may do just that. There’s a real chance both Meretz and Labor won’t be present in the next Knesset.

(Full disclosure: I am a long-standing member of Meretz, voted for it since 1988, and was somewhat comically elected as a party center member from Petah Tikva – Petah Tikva elected no male center members, so I was jumped up in the list as a sort of affirmative action.)

What happened? Several things, but the trigger for the disappearance of the Zionist left parties is the arrival of Gen. Benny Gantz, the butcher of Gaza, at the head of a new party, Gantz, who published videos extolling the carnage he inflicted on Gaza in the 2014 massacre known as Protective Edge, is running under two slogans: “Israel before everything” and “neither left nor right.” He shot to over 20 seats in the polls, and is considered to be a better candidate for prime minister than Netanyahu (by a slim margin: 43-42).

And this is the crux of this election. Gantz seems (for now, at least) to have a real shot at dethroning Netanyahu. Ever since the elections of 2009, removing Netanyahu became a fetish of the center-left: everything was sacrificed to the removal of this boogieman. One feckless leader of Labor and the late, unlamented, Kadima after another promised they’d bring him down. Their main way of doing so was to turn more and more rightward. They stopped mentioning the occupation, since they believed this issue held no interest with the electorate – and, worse, marked them as “leftists.”

Being called a “leftist” has become a swear word for over a decade now. This scared Labor and the various, ever-shifting center parties. Labor tried, in 2013, to officially remove all traces to the occupation, and focus only on social issues. This failed badly.

And while the left and center tied themselves in a knot trying to find a way to dethrone Netanyahu by imitating him, Netanyahu – who is, for all his corruption, pettiness and inability to tell the truth, a political strategic genius,  – undercut the basis of the left’s existence. In a campaign which began even before his election in 2009, he began shifting the meaning of Zionism. He understood well that liberal Zionism, and Jewish liberals, were a real danger to him and what he represented, so he worked to delegitimize them. Zionism was a term both sides could wield. The center-left unfortunately often used to it denote patriotism and by so doing excluded Palestinian citizens of Israel, but under Netanyahu “Zionism” came to mean Jewish supremacy. By this transformation of the term “Zionism”, Netanyahu wiped out the legitimacy of liberal Zionism.

By turning Zionism into Jewish supremacy (and yes, the elements of Jewish supremacy were always there, but the 1980s and 1990s saw a sort of normalization), Netanyahu drove another wedge: liberal parties cannot build a coalition without reliance on the Palestinian parties, yet they cannot remain politically viable among Jewish Israelis if they do. Netanyahu has already started using the line this past weekend that voting for Gantz means voting for the Palestinian parties, as he will have to rely on them to build his coalition.

The normalization of Jewish supremacy made sure that Jewish liberal parties would pay a high political price for accepting Israeli Palestinians as partners. It also radicalized many Israeli Palestinian activists. As a result, in a massive own goal, the Joint List refused to sign a votes-sharing agreement with Meretz in 2015. Three years later, the Nationality Law – the epitome of the process of Jewish supremacy legitimization – made the situation even worse. Rabin could build a minority government, enjoying the support of out-of-coalition Palestinian parties, and bring about what is today described as a golden age for Palestinian citizens of Israel; his heirs cannot. As a result, they have no viable way to a coalition. Palestinian citizens found the majority of their countrymen doubting their citizenship and hollowing it out.

While no Palestinian parties have called for a boycott of the elections yet, we’re still to face the usual election ritual of Zionist parties trying to ban Balad from running. Normally, the Supreme Court strikes such bans down. This time, however, the right wing managed to stuff the court with some ultra-nationalist judges. If the Court decides Balad may not run, there would be huge pressure on the rest of the Palestinian parties to declare the elections a sham and boycott them. It’s worth noting that technically, Balad does violate the law which forbids parties who don’t support the idea of Israel being a “Jewish and democratic” country from running. The court used to turn a blind eye to that; it’s not at all certain it will do so again.

Normalizing the idea of Zionism as Jewish supremacy was one arm of Netanyahu’s pincer movement. Another was endless war. It should be noted that Netanyahu has one redeeming quality: he strongly dislikes real wars. War is unpredictable and he lacks, with evident justification, faith in the ability of IDF ground troops. He wants what was infamously termed as “cutting the grass,” short operations, preferably either for the air or by elite commando units, all backed up with precise intelligence, with the goal of targeting enemy leadership. Enduring Edge was an exception, and it looked like he would pay a heavy political price for it in 2015.

By emphasizing “cutting the grass” operations, Netanyahu conditioned Israelis to endless small scale war, for which they paid little price. As painless war became the new normal, Israelis erupted with rage anytime Palestinians fought back, painting them as monsters and those who sought to help and protect them.

The third and final arm of the Netanyahu pincer movement was the separation regime. Aside from settlers and soldiers, few Israelis now meet Palestinians. In the 1970s and 1980s, my father employed Palestinian workers, many of them Gazans; they slept in our house; I slept in theirs; one of them named his first daughter after my sister. For Israelis who grew up during the First Intifada and afterwards, this situation looks dreamlike, hallucinatory. Netanyahu didn’t start this process – Rabin did; but he reaped the benefits.

And, of course, there is a ghost haunting the left: the failure of the Oslo Accords. They burned and crashed in 2001. I’m not going to do another of those debilitating rounds of “whose fault was it”: I’d rather have a nice glass of hemlock. The point is, the left is still crashing and burning. No one came up with an alternative plan, and everyone still clings to the ashes of the two state solution even as it long became clear that this train blew up along with the station.

It’s been 18 years now, the Oslo Accords are actually a right-wing tool, and the left is still unable to come up with anything better. Liberal Zionism is gone as an option for a generation at least, and Gantz is right on at least one point: there is no longer left or right. The vast majority of Israeli Jews are now Jewish supremacists. Some embrace this supremacy eagerly, others cling to it while bemoaning cruel fate has brought them, good liberals that they are, to this low state.

It’s possible, though still unlikely, that Gantz will take the elections. He will find it hard to build a coalition. Likud is not a me-too party. It will not join a government led by another party. Even if Gantz managed to build a coalition, it would be an improved Likud government. The Jewish left is essentially wiped out – and, until it realizes it has to be left first and Jewish later, it is unlikely to make a comeback.

To make a long story short, April 9th isn’t likely to be an Appomattox; more likely, a Bull Run.

Yossi Gurvitz

Yossi Gurvitz is a journalist and a blogger, and has covered the occupation extensively.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

73 Responses

  1. Mooser on February 5, 2019, 3:09 pm

    We’re all Jewish Supremacists now. But some Jews are more supreme than others.

    ” Within the Orthodox movement, there has been a push in recent years to get the Rabbinate to recognize DNA test results as a legitimate way of establishing whether an individual is Jewish according to halakha. ” (Haaretz, link)

    And how do they do that? By “carrier testing”?

    • marc b. on February 5, 2019, 5:07 pm

      there’s genetics, then there’s biblical genetics, a field related to biblical archeology. i’m all for it. what a bleepin’ hornets nest of duplicity and corruption that will turn into.

      • Mooser on February 6, 2019, 11:44 am

        “bleepin’ hornets nest of duplicity and corruption…”

        How can that happen when everybody has a known, tested, percentage? Just think how much simpler Israeli elections will be. Israelis can simply ‘vote their percentage’, not that they have much choice. You can’t fight your custard.

        I wonder what the minimum will be? 50% certified Jewish genetic content, I should think. Is that high enough to assure a beneficial amount of exclusion?

      • Stephen Shenfield on February 6, 2019, 9:55 pm

        Opening up the prospect of a future in which people can make themselves more or less ‘Jewish’ by means of genetic engineering?

      • Mooser on February 7, 2019, 5:48 pm

        “future in which people can make themselves more or less ‘Jewish’ by means of genetic engineering?”

        Well, I don’t know if they can make themselves more Jewish, but they will certainly be able to prove they are more Jewish. And isn’t that what really matters?

      • RoHa on February 8, 2019, 4:19 am

        More Jewish, less Jewish. Is there anyone who is recognized as the most Jewish? And is that person as Jewish as it is possible to be, or is there no upper limit to Jewishness?

    • YoniFalic on February 7, 2019, 1:20 am

      The article is not referring to the sort of bogus DNA analysis that looks for evidence of a Jewish race and that has no statistical significance.

      The article is referring to species of genetic fingerprinting. Such a test is used to determine relatedness of two people.

      I am probably the last to defend the Israeli rabbinate, but these genetic fingerprinting tests are perfectly legitimate for determining whether two people are in the relationship of parent and child or in the relationship of siblings.

      This analysis is unrelated to the nonsensical genetic anthropology and statistical genetics analysis the Doron Behar and similar ideological pseudo-scientists claim to make.

  2. Kay24 on February 5, 2019, 6:29 pm

    Crooked Bibi has taken Israel down a dangerous path, and it seems the population likes it.
    America seems to like it too, or else why should they be in bed with Butcher Beebs? We keep sending billions of dollars in aid, and arms for this?

    Breaking the Silence

    Two days ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called on the Jewish Home Party to unite with “Otzma Yehudit” (Jewish Power), a right-wing party comprised of students and followers of Rabbi Meir Kahane, who ran for the Knesset in the 1980s calling for a Palestinian population transfer. Here’s a breakdown of the political rise, fall, and resurrection of Kahanism, to date:
    1984 – Kahane was elected to the Knesset. Due to his racist statements he was boycotted by all Knesset members from the right and left-wing.
    1988 – On account of the racist nature of his political party, Kach, they were forbidden from running for the Knesset.
    1994 – Baruch Goldstein, Kahane’s disciple, massacred 29 Palestinians while they were praying at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. The world declares Kach a terrorist organization.
    1995 – Yigal Amir assassinates Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. During Amir’s interrogation he said that Goldstein inspired him to carry out the murder: “It started after Goldstein. That was when I had the idea that Rabin needed to be taken down.”
    2019 – Bibi calls on religious political parties to unite with the new Kach.

    Surprised? Don’t be.

    Hebron is the world capital of Kahanism. It’s not by chance that Kiryat Arba established a park named after Kahane and dedicated a burial plot to Goldstein; Hebron is a laboratory given to Kahanists by the government, where experiments are conducted on a disenfranchised population; it’s a greenhouse for the growth of “rotten apples,” who can do almost anything they please, risk-free of law enforcement or consequences. Look at what the current government has granted the settlement there: the special status of a municipality; a broad cut in the budget of government offices to transfer 22 million shekels for the settlement’s expansion; reassumption of control over the city’s wholesale market; expulsion of the international observer force (TIPH) – stationed there to document settler violence – at the settlers’ request, of course. And naturally, the decision that is made anew each day – to endanger the lives of roughly 650 soldiers stationed in the city, to protect the 800 settlers who live there.
    Anyone who has looked at the reality in Hebron head on, could see this coming from miles away.

    The government has been embracing Kahanists for years already. But only recently has it stop being ashamed of them. Come and see for yourselves: https://goo.gl/vUg4JG

    • amigo on February 5, 2019, 8:08 pm

      ” expulsion of the international observer force (TIPH) – stationed there to document settler violence – at the settlers’ request, of course. “. Kay 24

      Correction Kay!!

      By order of the Settlers.

  3. Marnie on February 6, 2019, 12:13 am

    Yes, some are more supreme than others. some are dirtier than others, but we’re all on the same sinking ship. Some will give their seat on the lifeboat to those who’ve suffered at the hands of zionism and its manifold enablers and others will continue to murder to get a seat.

  4. YoniFalic on February 6, 2019, 12:42 am

    I have to remind Yossi that George Tamarin showed in 1966 that Israeli school children between 8 and 14 were already thoroughly indoctrinated in anti-ethical thinking. I certainly was, and I would probably still think anti-ethically if I did not suffer from hyperthymesia.

    I noticed that Mondoweiss already hosted a posting on Tamarin.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2015/12/forgotten-society-psychologist/

    • Egbert on February 6, 2019, 9:00 am

      FWIW, four out of the five Tamarin books, described as being unavailable to purchase, are listed by WorldCat as being held at various university and public libraries in the US, Canada, UK, and Netherlands.

      • Stephen Shenfield on February 6, 2019, 10:05 pm

        Marina Williamson, one of Ilan Pappe’s graduate students, was doing some more research on Tamarin.

    • YoniFalic on February 6, 2019, 11:29 pm

      On second thought, we were not so much indoctrinated in anti-ethical thinking as in an ethnic fundamentalist ethics, in which anything was ethically acceptable that was good for the Jewish people.

      Claudia Koonz described an ethnic fundamentalist mentality in The Nazi Conscience, and this mentality seemed very familiar and very Israeli to me.

      I wonder whether Gurvitz has read the book.

      • Mooser on February 7, 2019, 5:59 pm

        “On second thought”

        “Yoni” you could very easily stick with the first thought. When I read “indoctrinated in ant-ethical thinking“, it made me wince, it described it all too well.

  5. Elizabeth Block on February 6, 2019, 11:31 am

    “Under Netanyahu “Zionism” came to mean Jewish supremacy. By this transformation of the term “Zionism”, Netanyahu wiped out the legitimacy of liberal Zionism.”

    Sorry, but Zionism is, by its very nature, Jewish supremacy, and always has been. Netanyahu just made it unmistakably clear. He didn’t create it.

    • YoniFalic on February 6, 2019, 1:02 pm

      I agree with Elizabeth. Zionism presupposes that the mythical historical and national rights of Eastern Europeans, whose recent ancestors practiced Rabbinic Judaism and whose more remote ancestors were pagans or Christians who converted to Judaism, are superior to the human rights, democratic rights, and property rights of the native Palestinian population.

      It is hard to be more extreme, more racist, more chauvinist, and more supremacist than Zionists are.

      • echinococcus on February 6, 2019, 5:11 pm

        “It is hard to be more extreme, more racist, more chauvinist, and more supremacist than Zionists are.”

        And I knew with mathematical certainly that the proof would be ready within a couple posts, at most, from yours. With the added world-champion absence of logic.

        Sure as hell, there it was, bylined Mondo-Nut:
        “Hamas has repeatedly agreed to accept what you claim [a state based on the pre-1967 war borders] – in exchange for nothing at all.” Accepting to make do with an invader state is… nothing at all.

  6. echinococcus on February 6, 2019, 5:21 pm

    Pieces by other than Zionists are getting increasingly rarer with time on this web site. At least, that’s my impression, not based on any research. Which would be very welcome indeed.

    Yes, it’s important to understand how the enemy thinks but must that come at the price of becoming a propaganda organ for “liberal” Zionists, who sure have more than enough outlets of their own?

    • annie on February 6, 2019, 6:07 pm

    • Danaa on February 6, 2019, 8:35 pm

      Actually, you are being unfair to Gurvitz. He is and always was, an iconoclast. You can’t smear him with the same brush you smear everyone else (rightly or not). In Israel, he is among a very small, special population of those who were once religious, orthodox even, and then left the fold. Those refugees from orthodoxy can be the most radical, and Yossi is, by all accounts, a radical in the Israeli context.

      You should take a tour through his posts. No two are alike. None can be categorized into this or that ideological bin. I would also say, that Gurvitz, having escaped “the fold” brings insights into Israeli society that few can.

      I would not call him a “liberal zionist” though I am not sure what I’d call him, if anything.

      My advice is that sometimes it’s a good idea to stay away from easy labels. Not everyone is black or white. Not everyone even relates to color.

      Frankly if I were to take a trip to israel (assuming they’d let me in, which is by no means certain) Yossi Gurvitz is one of the people I’d like to meet. I think we could have an interesting conversation and those are nothing to sneeze at.

      • annie on February 6, 2019, 9:20 pm

        i’d love to meet him danaa. when phil went a few years ago i suggested he meet him and interview him and he did. incredible. an incredible man and a wealth of knowledge.

        “Zionism as a force is dead.” 2012, includes video.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/the-radicalization-of-yossi-gurvitz/

      • YoniFalic on February 6, 2019, 11:47 pm

        I left Israel mostly to get away from Israel because of my mental collapse after Cast Lead, but today I could not return in the role of a non-Zionist or of an anti-Zionist because I would be a beneficiary of genocide.

        Possibly such status is better than living in Israel in the role of someone that commits genocidal acts, but it seems almost as bad to me to be a beneficiary as to be a genocidaire.

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 12:36 am

        danaa, did you ever see this? he gets down to the nitty gritty.

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 1:12 am

        phil got the goods on this one. gurvitz: “i think we will suffer a catastrophic defeat”

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 3:18 am

        Those refugees from orthodoxy can be the most radical, and Yossi is, by all accounts, a radical in the Israeli context.

        in any context he is radical, in that he tells unvarnished truth no matter what the personal cost (which has been great, another story). possibly because of his genius they have not killed him. he will go down in history. his work for yesh din is unparalleled. there is no measure for his value.

        only fools dismiss him. i repeat, he will go down in history,
        outlive the rest of us in that regard.

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 3:53 am

        i’m not kidding when i wrote earlier “there’s a lot about yossi gurvitz on this website than what you will find under his byline”. one example is:

        A pogrom in Qusra http://mondoweiss.net/2013/02/a-pogrom-in-qusra/ (note how, in 2013, this is exactly what we are witnessing today in al-Mughayyir http://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/israeli-settlers-another-palestinian/ )

        here, i cite gurvitz. 2013.

        A group of settlers, coming from the direction of one of the most notorious outposts, Esh Kodesh, raided …Palestinian village of Kusra. Some six Palestinians were wounded. The Israeli media reported a “conflict” in the village. There wasn’t any.

        A conflict is what happens when two sides of more or less equal strength clash. What took place in Kusra is much more similar to the Czarist period and to the American South before the passage of the civil rights laws: a group of bullies attacking a persecuted minority, and then receiving the protection of the law enforcement forces.

        Look at these pictures, taken yesterday: Settlers and soldiers firing together at the residents of Kusra, while the latter are standing on their lands. The regular Israel, whose media makes an effort not to report what goes on in the West Bank – more on this below – will automatically excuse it by saying the army has to put down “disturbances of order.” Okay. So what are the settlers doing there?

        The repeating pattern is of attacks, theft, damage to property – with the police doing nothing and the army becoming a part of the problem. In an incident from last September, Palestinians were attacked by settlers; one Palestinian was reportedly kidnapped by them for a short while. In response, the army forces arrived…. and used tear gas and stun grenades on the Palestinians. The police closed the case, claiming “perpetrator unknown.” …..

        this is only one of many times i cited yossi. and some sh*t nobody anonymous coward w/pretense of moral superiority claims gurvitz a liberal zionist? there are no words for my disgust. why? only an agent of my ideological opponent would tar this man. iow my enemy.

      • Jon66 on February 7, 2019, 7:36 am

        “because I would be a beneficiary of genocide.“
        Maybe a course in American history would be useful.

      • Mooser on February 7, 2019, 6:07 pm

        “Maybe a course in American history would be useful.”

        To find the “beneficiaries of genocide”? Well, in a way, we need look no further than Washington’s letter to the Touro Synagogue. Talk about being singled out!

      • YoniFalic on February 8, 2019, 6:03 am

        I should have been more explicit.

        I left Israel mostly to get away from Israel because of my mental collapse after Cast Lead, but today I could not return in the role of a non-Zionist or of an anti-Zionist because I would be a beneficiary of post-Auschwitz and post-Nuremberg IMT genocide.

        Possibly such status is better than living in Israel in the role of someone that commits genocidal acts, but it seems almost as bad to me to be a beneficiary as to be a genocidaire.

        Nuremberg IMT is starting point for the International Anti-Genocide Legal Regime.

        After Auschwitz and after Nuremberg IMT, it was vile and criminal to found a state in post-Auschwitz genocide.

        Most Americans will admit something horrible was done to native Americans. Zionists almost never make such admission with respect to native Palestinians and spend a lot of time in attempting to delegitimize them.

        We certainly were unapologetic at Blich.

        American Zionists favor the term Fakestinian.

      • Danaa on February 8, 2019, 3:37 pm

        @jon66

        YoniFalic correctly draws a major distinction between the Americans and israelis – the former will, in general – conservative and liberal alike – admit and accept that a great evil was done to the American Indians. Even serious conservatives and fundies will be quick to express remorse. Not only that but in nearly all schools the genocide of the Indians is touched upon in history classes and is hardly ever excused by anything more than “bad things happened in the world”.

        These days to have Indian blood – even a smidgen (as apparently Elizabeth Warren professes – is something to be proud of. People who do genealogy peruse family history in search of a drop of Indian blood. It’s almost like a mark of distinction, of deeper connection to the history of the American land., something that can only be had through native heritage.

        Even Hollywood movies no longer present the American Indian as anything worse than noble, even when still “a bit of a savage”; or at best as epitomizing a deep wisdom, at one with nature.

        Now pivot to little ol’ israel. Do you see any difference? do you see any true respect demonstrated through culture and history to the palestinians heritage? the pre-Yishuv people who lived, farmed the land and created culture there? is there any formal acknowledgement of the special status of palestinian israelis in the history books? are children writing essays about the injustice done to the Palestinians? is there an acknowledgement of the massacres and expulsions in the name of “Judaizing” the land as the original sin?

        most importantly – will there ever be a day when Israelis will proudly proclaim their own Palestinian ethnic heritage? now, some would say, yes – give it another hundred years. But others would say, others who understand distinctions based in religion, an arcane and archaic one, they will say that the arrow is pointing away from such future outcome. That it is the spirit of the zealots that are taking over. That to Jews, miscegation as the ultimate crime will remain as that – a crime against what they see as their “peoplehood’ all mixed up with their god-worshiphood (ie, even when they don’t believe, there’s still that worshiphood of self-peoplehood).

        I think YoniFalic may agree that Israelis will always take the stand of Custer, never the Shoshonis or the Apaches. Certainly we see little pointing in any other direction, a conciliatory one, a more gracious one, which is what Yoss Gurvitz seems to maintain as well. He decries what he sees, and has been doing that consistently, and there’s much to decry every day, everywhere.

        The better comparison for israelis is that they are now and will always be like the Turks, who have denied and will continue to deny that there was anything untowards done to the Armenians, other than “they just picked up and left of their own accord, and unfortunately some ended up kind of dead…..”.

        At the end of the day the difference between people is not so much in the amount or degree of evil committed by their ancestors, but in the way the evil is perceived as that, an evil. One which every generation and every individual has to come to terms with, each however best they can. Standing firm in their denial of evil built into their culture singles Israelis out as a deeply spiritually unenlightened people. Even if individuals rise above that as some do. History, when finally revised centuries hence, will judge those individuals well, even if their numbers are not great.

      • Jon66 on February 8, 2019, 4:26 pm

        Yoni,
        “After Auschwitz and after Nuremberg IMT, it was vile and criminal to found a state in post-Auschwitz genocide.”

        Is it only founding a state that is criminal and vile through something you consider genocide? Is genocidw without founding a state such as in Rwanda vile and criminal?
        The Holocaust occurred before Nuremberg but was found to be vile and criminal. Do you disagree with those findings?

      • Mooser on February 8, 2019, 6:45 pm

        “Jon66”, do you understand the principle that being the victim of genocide at one time does not give us ‘genocide credits’ or indulgences?

      • RoHa on February 8, 2019, 8:53 pm

        Jon, what are you going on about? Yoni’s statement does not imply or exclude any of those other possibilities.

      • Jon66 on February 8, 2019, 9:41 pm

        Roha
        I’m trying to understand why he believes it’s impermissible to live in Israel because it would make him the beneficiary of genocide, but he feels at home in America. He says that because Israel was founded after Nuremberg that is the difference. I’m not sure I understand the difference if genocide at any time is a crime why make the distinction. If genocide was a crime prior to Nuremberg then living in the US violates the principle. If genocide before Nuremberg doesn’t count then The aholocaust wasn’t illegal

      • Talkback on February 9, 2019, 6:34 am

        Jon66: “He says that because Israel was founded after Nuremberg that is the difference. I’m not sure I understand the difference if genocide at any time is a crime why make the distinction.”

        We all think that genocide has been a crime since time immemorial. But that is our post 1945 view today. It wasn’t the view back then or when the US was established. it took humanity a long time to consider genocide to be a wrong doing. And unfortunately it was only at Nuremberg where it was decided that it should be prosecuted. To commit this crime after Nuremberg is even worse, because nobody can claim that it isn’t a commonly condemned practice. It is even worse if survivors of a genocide commit genocide, because they inherently whitewash it and denigrate the memory of its original victims.

      • Jon66 on February 9, 2019, 9:27 am

        Talk,
        At Nuremberg it was decided that retroactively genocide was a crime. It was too late to prosecute a Andrew Jackson etc and so there was no trialed you believe that the US committed genocide against the natives.
        If the principle is that the original crime of genocide carries without end to any future beneficiaries no matter how many generations, then why make a distinction between genocide that was prosecuted and one that was not? If the prosecution is the defining factor then Israel should be innocent until proven guilty.
        If your saying that the timeline begins with Nuremberg, well Nuremberg was based upon retroactive crimes. Nuremberg said that these acts were criminal even though not strictly illegal on the books.
        If the principle is that it is wrong to benefit from genocide, then picking 1946 as the date seems like a technical argument.

      • Talkback on February 9, 2019, 10:40 am

        Jon66: “If the principle is that the original crime of genocide carries without end to any future beneficiaries no matter how many generations, then why make a distinction between genocide that was prosecuted and one that was not?”

        The distinction is not between genocide that was prosecuted or not. The Nuremberg trials set the precedent that from now on genocide can be prosecuted.

        Jon66: “If the prosecution is the defining factor then Israel should be innocent until proven guilty.”

        Prosecution is not “the defining factor”. That it is forbidden and can be legally prosecuted is the defining factor. But why do you think that Nazi Germany was innocent until proven guilty as charged?

        Jon66: “If the principle is that it is wrong to benefit from genocide, then picking 1946 as the date seems like a technical argument.”

        Again, it is strictly illegal since then and can be prosecuted. That wasn’t the case before.

      • YoniFalic on February 9, 2019, 11:58 am

        Jon66’s responses to my comments discussing my inability after mental collapse to live in Israel in the role of beneficiary of genocide provide fascinating almost archetypal examples of hasbarah-mongering technique.

        First he tries to deny ethical development in human culture by equating genocidal acts in the 20th and 21st century with alleged genocidal acts in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.

        Second he tries to suggest that I focus only on genocidal acts committed by white racist European Slavo-Turk invaders like himself or like me — I suppose to suggest that I am “antisemitically” Jew (really Slavo-Turk) obsessed.

        Third he tries to switch my original dynamic modality (psychological development made it impossible for me to live in Israel in the role of beneficiary of genocide) into deontic modality (impermissibility of living in Israel) — I suppose to suggest that I apply one rule to a state founded in genocide committed by Slavo-Turks like him or like me and another rule to a state founded in genocide committed by non-Slavo-Turks. It is another attempt to imply that I am an antisemite.

        [The third dishonest hasbarah-mongering response includes the following because he tries to suggest that it’s unfair to white racist murderous Jews (really European Slavo-Turks) because they should be able to commit today the same sort of racist murderous genocidal acts that white racist murderous Christian Europeans committed in the past — another attempt at implying I am an antisemite.]

        Fourth then he tries to make a pettifogging legal argument that Alan Dershowitz or Eugene Kantorovich would make. Kantorovich is a less well-known fake legal scholar (really hasbarah-monger) at Antonin Scalia Law School. Giving such a poor scholar but high energy hasbarah-monger a professorship is a way to increase contributions from wealthy racist genocide-supporting Jewish (really Slavo-Turk) Zionists.

        If I have time, I will later address the legal principles that place the Nuremberg IMT at terminus a quo (starting point) of international anti-genocide legal regime and the relationship of the Nuremberg IMT to the international legal definition of genocide. Genocide in international law is defined in the International Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

      • Mooser on February 9, 2019, 1:06 pm

        Shorter “Jon66”: ‘ On genocide, I have only one question: is it good for the Jews, or bad for the Jews?’

        (“Yoni”, at least in the US: “As goes the Right, so goes the all-rightnik” )

      • Jon66 on February 9, 2019, 2:56 pm

        Yoni
        I didn’t say anything about AS. That’s certainly not my intent. If you can’t move to Israel because of personal trauma I understand. But that’s very different from not living there because you see it as a benefit of previous genocide.
        I hope you get the help you need

      • Jon66 on February 9, 2019, 3:05 pm

        Talk
        The Holocaust happened before Nuremberg. The argument is that genocide committed prior to Nuremberg was illegal as well as after.
        Yoni clears it up later down. It’s not that he objects to living in a territory and benefiting from genocide. Rather he can’t live in Israel because of trauma.

      • Mooser on February 9, 2019, 5:27 pm

        “because of…”

        Doing yourself a whole lot of good, “Jon66”. Gobs of it.

      • YoniFalic on February 9, 2019, 7:27 pm

        It is necessary to review basic legal principle before discussing

        1) Nuremberg IMT,

        2) why the State of Israel is a criminal state founded after Auschwitz and after Nuremberg IMT, and

        3) why the colonial-settler invader-genocidaire conglomeration must be removed completely to give relief to the native population that suffered and continues to suffer genocide at the hands of the criminal conglomeration.

        Anglo-American criminal law follows the principle of criminal liability as Edward Coke stated it in the 17th century.

        actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea

        An act does not create culpability unless intent be (characteristically) culpable.

        Because “sit” is characteristic subjunctive, this principle should be stated without negations in English.

        An act creates culpability (in proportion) as the intent is culpable.

        Example.

        Homicide receives different or no punishment if the intent is found to be:

        1) intentional with premeditation,

        2) intentional without premeditation,

        3) voluntary without premeditation but with mentally defective intent,

        4) involuntary without premeditation without intent but with recklessness,

        5) etc.

        All the crimes with which the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal charged Nazis were well defined at the time of Nuremberg IMT, and those punished met existing customary and covenantal international legal standards of actus reus and mens rea.

        The prosecution pointed out either implicitly or explicitly that the criminal mens rea was beyond what had previously charged to accused war criminals, and in some cases the judges agreed in written decisions.

        Raphael Lemkin wrote this mens reior or even mens reissima into his proposed international definition of genocide.

        Thus we consider Nuremberg IMT the starting point for the international anti-genocide legal regime.

        Caselaw of judges of international tribunals from the time period between the Nuremberg IMT and time point at which the International Convention for the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide went into effect is customary international antigenocide law.

        States and individuals had committed the crime of genocide before the Nuremberg IMT, but the mens rea had never been defined.

        One example is Czarist treatment of the Circassian Muslim population.

        Sometime Turks argue that the three Pashas during the WW1 period did not have requisite intent and thus there was no Ottoman genocide. That claim is crap. The problem probably lies in disparate discussion of the different victims of the time period. Balkan states, whose citizens were former Ottoman Christian and Muslim subjects committed an orgy of genocide on their Muslim citizens on independence. Until people begin to discuss Muslim victims of genocide as Christian victims of genocide are discussed, Turkey (and Turks in general) won’t acknowledge the genocide of Armenians.

        While the white racist European Slavo-Turk invaders committed acts of genocide before 1947-8 (Zionist murder gangs and death squads of 30s provide numerous examples), in 47-8 Zionists put into effect plans that they had been developing since the 1880s. Zionist acti rei and mens rei are well documented — actually much better than German Nazi acti rei and mens rea.

        [Of course, only a moron, ignoramus, or liar denies German Nazi mens rea associated with genocidal acts before the Holocaust or associated with the Holocaust itself.]

        Zionists of 47-8 were in every way as culpable as German Nazis. An international military tribunal should have been convened, and a lot of the Zionist leadership should have been hanged just like many of the German Nazi leaders were hanged.

        And here is the problem with failing both to abolish the white racist genocidal Slavo-Turk invader state and also to remove the criminal colonial-settler invader-genocidaire population.

        How can the world take the international anti-genocide legal regime seriously as long as white racist genocidal European Slavo-Turks receive a pass to commit genocide?

        There is no statute of limitations on genocide.

        The criminal conglomeration is just as guilty today as it was in 48 (already after the starting point of the international anti-genocide legal regime). The criminal conglomeration must be removed because to do otherwise says that genocidaires win if they can delay their punishment long enough.

        Creating respect for the international anti-genocide legal regime requires abolishing the State of Israel. There is no way around this point.

        As for US citizens that relocate to the State of Israel, 18 U.S. Code § 1091 (Genocide) is explicitly clear. Those that don’t take part in violence might not be guilty under § 1091 (a), but they are certainly guilty under § 1091 (c) & (d).

        If I were the prosecutor, I would prosecute such people to the maximum, and I would expect the judge to sentence such people to the maximum.

        We already have an example of the result if such prosecution and punishment does not take place.

        The USA would be much better off today if 50 – 100,000 irredentist former Confederates had been hanged in the decade after the Civil War.

      • YoniFalic on February 9, 2019, 10:00 pm

        I was tired when I tried to explain the issues of the genocide and of the genocidal acts committed by white racist European Slavo-Turk colonial-settler invader-genocidaires to found and to maintain the criminal State of Israel.

        I meant conventional international law and not covenantal international law.

        I also wrote mens rei when I meant mens rea.

        There are probably other typos.

      • RoHa on February 10, 2019, 12:44 am

        @Jon 66. Thank you. That’s much clearer than those random questions.

        In Yoni’s defence, I will point out that there is a difference between residing in a country in which the genocide has stopped and been acknowledged, and a country in which the genocide is both continuing and continually being denied.

      • Jon66 on February 10, 2019, 9:37 am

        Roha,
        I agree there is a difference although I disagree that Israel is currently committing genocide.
        However, Yoni states, “The criminal conglomeration must be removed because to do otherwise says that genocidaires win if they can delay their punishment long enough.”

        So I understand the practical aspects and the need to leave Israel for PTSD reasons, but if someone feels strongly that it is wrong to benefit from prior genocide, then it seems inconsistent to live in the US.

      • YoniFalic on February 10, 2019, 12:47 pm

        The international community picked a moment (Nuremberg IMT) and said that from this moment forward genocide is not permitted and will be punished.

        I can understand how a beneficiary of post Nuremberg IMT and ongoing genocide might object and try to make any sort of ridiculous pettifogging excuse to exculpate himself.

        Yet it is just as evil as Holocaust denial to deny

        1) that Slavo-Turk colonial-settler invader-genocidaires committed post-Nuremberg IMT genocide and

        2) that they continue to perpetrate genocidal acts.

        I served in Cast Lead and under orders participated in such acts.

      • Mooser on February 10, 2019, 12:59 pm

        “So I understand the practical aspects.” “Jon66”

        You understand a young man is drafted into the IDF, probably in all innocence, and then later realizes he has participated in less-than-honorable warfare, under orders? And has been raised with lies about his country’s history?

        Is that an experience you are blithely ready to “understand”Jon66”?

      • Danaa on February 10, 2019, 2:45 pm

        @jon66 but if someone feels strongly that it is wrong to benefit from prior genocide, then it seems inconsistent to live in the US.

        By your reasoning it’d be inconsistent to live almost anywhere in the world. That’s Homo Sapiens for you – the story of evolution through massacres. Which of course, the Tanakh you are no doubt fond of ,gave the blueprint for (mind you, with a special dispensation for the Israelites, cf, the “old jews”. Massacres are bad when others do them, but when “the god of israel” commands the Israelites to do it, why, there’s no such thing as enough killing, is there? or did I miss something?).

        You should really read harari’s take on Homo Sapiens (tiny booklet, so it’s popular…). Of course, harari, being israeli and all, failed to take the next step in his reasoning about what happens to species who reach the top of the food chain too fast….though this could be a bit deep for you.

        Yoni makes a perfectly good point, namely that at some point it time – say the post WWII Nuremberg trials, genocides became officially unacceptable to most of humanity. Of course, Pol Pot did not get the message, but then neither did the modern day israelites. And while Yoni did not participate in Pol pot’s expungions of its population, he did participate in israel’s IDF, which has conducted massacres in Gaza, by all accounts (stopping only because…..the world…blah, blah. Look hard in israel and you’ll find little remorse).

        Humanity, despite occasional slippages, did make some progress over the eons. We find human sacrifice in poor taste, for example. And slavery has been sent to never never land. And the genocides of natives in the process of colonialization are no longer kosher, which means that the American Indians are viewed as the white hats and the settlers’ hats have become kind of grey (if not altogether black). Same in Australia and the same in Canada. What was done once is frowned upon now, which is really all post-genocidal generations can do – read their own history with introspection and with trepidation.

        But not so in israel, which is the point I keep adding over Yoni’s argument. We may not be able to resurrect the many dead Palestinians who paid the price for Israel becoming the “land for Jews only, because we say so”, but a civilized country would find a way to accept the blemish upon its own history and to seek to repair the world which they have destroyed (Tikun Olam, right?). But to this day, not only do they not repent or show signs of moral contrition (much less willingness to offer actual reparations) but they continue the enterprise of ethnic cleansing, which occasionally breaks into outright massacres. Which also means that many in Israel must continue to serve – as reservists – in its brutal army of killers. At least in America he will not be asked to kill more Indians (though yes, we can talk about inner city police brutality and DAPL, but those are not exactly “massacres”, are they?). And while American military continues to do bad things around the world, those are not quite the same as “settler colonialism” (at least I didn’t get the invitation to settle in Iraq or Afganistan……).

        May be it’d help your immortal soul were you to cut out the pilpul about “Nuremberg was in the past and so were the Indians” and consider my points which are about israelis of the present, who, for the most part (we can quibble about the percentage), will not even flinch were “a final solution to the Palestinian problem” be instituted (as long as it was relatively “humane”. I’ll give them that). From your line of argument I gather you may not mind all that much either (though being American and all you’d prefer it wasn’t done in broad daylight).

      • Talkback on February 10, 2019, 3:48 pm

        Jon66: “The argument is that genocide committed prior to Nuremberg was illegal as well as after.”

        Whose argument? I’m not sure that it violated customary law before Nuremberg. But it was definetly illegal after. That’s the point.

        Jon66: “I disagree that Israel is currently committing genocide.”

        “The Genocide of the Palestinian People: An International Law and Human Rights Perspective”
        https://ccrjustice.org/genocide-palestinian-people-international-law-and-human-rights-perspective

      • Keith on February 10, 2019, 4:57 pm

        DANAA- “Humanity, despite occasional slippages, did make some progress over the eons.”

        As seen through the eyes of a privileged First World person, perhaps. However, from the perspective of most people in the Third World, “progress” refers to the technological improvement in the modalities of repression and exploitation. If we simply look at mass-murder and financial coercion, vastly greater numbers are being destroyed by empire now than in the past, including those killed by proxy terrorists as empire outsources violence. International law is a weapon used by the first World to bludgeon the Third World when it suits them and to be ignored when it suits them. And then there is the nuclear weapons threat of annihilation hanging over our heads thanks to empire. And if we don’t nuke ourselves, catastrophic climate change will due us in. There is no morality when power-lust and empire are involved. Israel is part of empire and reflects Western lack of morality. Sorry to have to disagree with you and Yoni, et al, but America the beautiful ain’t. And I can’t criticize Israel and remain silent over the even greater crimes of empire, particularly now that we are entering a period of extreme instability at the end of the hydrocarbon era, the survivability of the species in peril. Russia, China, the Middle East and now South America, the empire is on a rampage. If this is “progress,” what constitutes incipient disaster?

      • Mooser on February 10, 2019, 7:48 pm

        “Jon66”, really, before you conclude that genocide is good for Jews you should learn to count.

      • Danaa on February 12, 2019, 3:58 pm

        Keith, you have such a dark view of the world! you do know, most of us need to concentrate on a few points of light out there to keep a path forward…..

        Your posts often remind me of some favorite Bergman movies, like “Through the glass darkly” and “passion” ( though he always uses the themes of some mental breakdown and, of course, the oppressive overhang of religion, to highlight his view of the inner world of intellect as a dreary place). It’s funny how unlike many other great movies of old Bergman’s and Felini’s seem to have stood the test of time (81/2 is as fun now to watch as it ever were). Goddard’s unfortunately didn’t. They just seem infinitely boring and self-absorbed now (probably always were. Those are the kind of movies critics liked and art house audiences felt they should see, but probably were not much more than a sick joke perpetrated on the movie going/movie making public – as in “lets see how boring I can make it and still get a good review!”).

        There I changed the topic, didn’t I? anyways, I’m always glad to see your replies – – they make me pause as I run through the meadows chasing elusive points of light……if only for a moment.

      • Keith on February 12, 2019, 5:34 pm

        DANAA- “Keith, you have such a dark view of the world!”

        Most of the world has become a dark place outside the Western gated enclaves of privilege. And now even these are disappearing. I fear that the endgame is at hand with worse yet to come. Silver lining? What a wonderful opportunity for gallows humor! Seriously, I would not extol the US/corporate empire as a moral example for anyone to emulate.

    • YoniFalic on February 7, 2019, 2:47 am

      As I said, religious history is an adjunct of faith and not history in any secular sense.

      Gurvitz is confused about ancient and modern history, but he is correct that the Jerusalem Temple was destroyed on purpose. The Romans destroyed the Egyptian Judaic Temple shortly after destroying the Jerusalem Judaic Temple. The Casiphia Judaic Temple was outside of Roman reach.

  7. echinococcus on February 6, 2019, 10:35 pm

    Thank you, Danaa. I’d fully agree with a lot of what you say about Gurvitz, even though I am less familiar with him than you surely are. There is no doubt that (looking especially at his other posts) he is an iconoclast and a real radical thinker… in the “Israeli” context, though, as you said.

    You’re right: “sometimes it’s a good idea to stay away from easy labels.” Sometimes there is interest in what the enemy thinks, sure. It will always come at the price of reinforcing and consolidating, in the readers’ mind, the unquestioned pillars of basic propaganda (like for example in Annie’s video of Gurvitz passing off as normal and natural the ideas that he’s “at home” as invader offspring and of a “Jewish” peoplehood, while considering himself separate from the Zionists.)

    That price, of course, has to be paid when it’s offset by the advantage of having a glance at the enemy mind. My point was that in broadcasting mostly, and unquestioned, the enemy mind, as I suspect the site may be doing, there’s no offset.

    Also, it’s not accurate to say that none of Gurvitz’ posts “can be categorized into this or that ideological bin”, see his defense in this very post of the Oslo blackmail and the “Meretz” position, his understanding of the Balad abstention, his clear, and revolting, “Under Netanyahu ‘Zionism’ came to mean Jewish supremacy”… of course all that is “liberal” Zionism. Also of course, publishing a majority of authors of a more or less similar persuasion, unchallenged, will end up painting the site owners in that corner.

    • annie on February 7, 2019, 12:43 am

      yet when palestinians speak, you have absolutely nothing to say do you

      http://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/between-feelings-sensations/

      hypocrite

      http://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/federal-targeting-academic/

      (both currently on our front page)

      yossi gurvitz is one of the smartest and most beautiful people on the planet. has more integrity in one breath than you will have in a lifetime.

      there’s a lot about yossi gurvitz on this website than what you will find under his byline. once again, the only person painted into a corner here — is you.

      you tried attacking another of our contributors recently, how’d that work out for you?

      • echinococcus on February 7, 2019, 1:09 am

        Sure, Annie. I never doubted Mr Gurvitz’ beauty or integrity. Or courage, either. You aren’t answering any of the worries I expressed.

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 4:12 am

        which worry would that be? that “publishing a majority of authors of a more or less similar persuasion, unchallenged, will end up painting the site owners in that corner.”

        do tell. when you totally ignore the voices of all our palestinian contributors? again, maybe it’s you painting yourself in to a corner. or digging your own grave.

        it’s occurred to me, EI has a comment section. they might be more to your liking. because, i can guarantee, your harping on MW contributors will not make one iota of difference wrt what voices are featured here. you’re worse than the worst fishwife.

      • echinococcus on February 7, 2019, 8:22 am

        Of course one won’t comment when one is more or less satisfied with what one reads, or thankful for learning, etc., or if one feels that whatever is bugging one has been already addressed. Also when it’s not worth the bother. That’s normal commenter behavior as far as I know. Also, of course I am not expecting the site owner to change his spots, as you seem to suggest. What an outlandish idea.

        One other reason to avoid writing in a discussion group may be when it becomes too tiresome to have one’s calves bitten by the site’s Cerberus pouncing every time, like clockwork, for every deviation from accepted orthodoxy or even terminology. But these bites are only figurative.

      • Mooser on February 7, 2019, 6:27 pm

        “It will always come at the price of reinforcing and consolidating, in the readers’ mind, the unquestioned pillars of basic propaganda”

        So you’ve made an astute judgement about the intelligence and discernment of the average Mondo reader, and you figure they are very susceptible to this “basic propaganda”?

      • annie on February 7, 2019, 6:55 pm

        Of course one won’t comment when one is more or less satisfied with what one reads, or thankful for learning, etc.

        so when you claim: “Pieces by other than Zionists are getting increasingly rarer with time on this web site.” you mean, except for the articles you don’t comment on. http://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/israeli-settlers-another-palestinian/

        http://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/observers-expulsion-escalation/

        pouncing every time, like clockwork, for every deviation

        we both know that’s not true, case in point: http://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/rejection-imperialism-criticism/

        it’s been weeks since i got on your case. phff.

      • echinococcus on February 7, 2019, 9:26 pm

        Sure, Mooser. Of course there is no war, and it’s obvious that there can be no propaganda if the reader has a mind.
        Keep the Mooserian Principles flowing.

    • Mooser on February 7, 2019, 6:46 pm

      “You’re right: “sometimes it’s a good idea to stay away from easy labels.”

      Easy labels like, say, “the enemy”?

    • Danaa on February 9, 2019, 3:20 pm

      @echi..” Sometimes there is interest in what the enemy thinks, sure. It will always come at the price of reinforcing and consolidating, in the readers’ mind, the unquestioned pillars of basic propaganda

      I’d take exception to this statement, for three reasons:

      1. In principle, an outlet that’s open to a variety of viewpoints ends up promulgating reasoned discussion in the end (ie, after one wades through the chaffe, and the riff-raff have been discouraged);

      2. We either believe that the palestinian viewpoint is grounded in reason (including moral reason) or we don’t. Meaning, if a position is just, allowing debate only ends up reinforcing the justness.

      3. Preaching only to the choir stifles the conversation and ends up discouraging many who have much to contribute. When strictly one viewpoint is allowed and anything else is outside the pail, that is exactly the definition of propaganda.

      Going back to Gurvitz – applying a label, such as “zionist” to him just because he happens to live in the place where he was raised, is irrelevant. To Israelis that label means little, since they are not yearning for zion any longer. In their own mind they are living it. Zionism means something specific to Americans and others who live outside the country, as they are the ones who may be busily justifying the right of jews to have a country where they are a majority by virtue of evicting and dispossessing others. The ones who actually live there – the argument about the right to have had a country in the first place is immaterial, since there is not going to be an exodus from israel just for moral reasons.

      That being said, for the people who are israelis there are serious disputes about how they move forward, even as they continue to benefit from colonialism. Gurvitz has much to say about this topic as he lives the reality of it, and through people like him we learn just how deeply entrenched the current impass is. He is telling us, the world, that no matter what our political leanings are, no matter how strongly we feel about can and should be done, the fact is Israelis are moving to the right, and have been for some time. They are also becoming more religious as well as more zealous. And while we may abhor the situation there, the israeli jews who live in Israel are not about to pick up stakes and leave any time soon.

      As for MW, it’s hard not to notice that the majority of responses are invariably generated in response to the occasional zionist who wanders in. Pieces written by Palestinians don’t generate many comments precisely because most find the situation just as appalling as the writers, so what more can they say? but should a zionist commentator wander in, the flood gates will open, and many times one can get some excellent insights, new reasonings or new perceptions of events.

      As for israelis who live in israel – I only wish we’d have more of them posting and commenting. After all, this site is focused on the I/P situation, which is over there, and is taking place in two languages not spoken by the vast majority of people who read and comment in MW. I suggest we need to hear the perspectives from over there much more than yet another, say, Jewish person’s lamentations in the US (not to discount those, of course). Gurvitz is one whose opinions and insights can only help the ones keen on understanding the reality on the ground. We need more such input not less, whether or not we agree with everything said..

      • annie on February 9, 2019, 3:54 pm

        thanks danaa, i have a question at the base of the thread no one has a responded to, if you have any insight i would appreciate it hearing it.

        sometimes it takes a long time to understand the dynamics of inside politics in a foreign country. i’m not very good at it. i would love to understand lebanon which has got to be the most confusing. it’s fair to be engaged with what’s going on in israel/palestine without understanding the political system, just like any country, venezuela for example. but if you are interested it takes research and listening to people from the country. the title itself, “a guide for the perplexed”, it’s not going to be for everyone because most people really don’t care given the nightmare going on — it’s enough to know if it’s not going to be netanyahu it will be another butcher. but if you want to know or understand how it works and what’s going on at an overall micro level, this is exactly the kind of article that’s helpful.

      • echinococcus on February 9, 2019, 11:51 pm

        Thanks, Danaa.

        Your opening points 1 thru 3 –of course. My concern was, however, stated very clearly as “Pieces by other than Zionists are getting increasingly rarer with time on this web site. At least, that’s my impression, not based on any research. Which would be very welcome indeed”, before it was made a federal case of by the usual gatekeeper reaction. Meaning, as later explicited, that all you say is fine but propaganda-induced thinking goes very often unchallenged (and some of the challenges are made a huge noise around.)

        Of course the category “Zionism” is different in Herrenrasse language use. Objectively though, as shown in your brilliant post to Annie re “Meretz” thinking, that is all ultimately about securing equal rights for invaders. Of course I’ll call it Zionism as long as it is within the definition of it. That doesn’t in the least deny the value of Gurvitz’ contribution.

        Again, it’s very important to know what the enemy thinks. My objection, again, is to what I subjectively perceive as “publishing a majority of authors of a more or less similar persuasion, unchallenged”, mark the last word. There isn’t much of such challenging coming from the editors, while the continuous attacks from gatekeepers generate a lot of accessory noise and unnecessary repetition. Essentially, I wasn’t saying anything different from what Hughes expressed in radically different words ( http://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/supremacists-politics-perplexed/comment-page-1/#comment-941190 )

  8. Tom Suarez on February 7, 2019, 4:19 pm

    Yossi Gurvitz wrote: “By turning Zionism into Jewish supremacy (and yes, the elements of Jewish supremacy were always there, but the 1980s and 1990s saw a sort of normalization)…”
    This statement obfuscates the nature of Zionism itself, as an ideology and in reality. Throughout the history of the Mandate period, throughout 1948 and through to “the 1980s and 1990s”, ethnic supremacism and ethnic violence were always integral to the Zionist project, always “normalized”. Dismissing this as “elements of Jewish supremacy were always there” is denial.
    Zionism itself, not right-wing PMs, is the problem.

    • MHughes976 on February 7, 2019, 5:21 pm

      I can’t understand Z, at any rate as put into practice in 1948, except as a claim for exclusive rights for people who are Jewish which, if granted, would create a form of political supremacy. How can a Zionist in Palestine who is involved in that terrible and continuing praxis possibly say of a Palestinian ‘(s)he has as much right to be here as I do’? There are many, Chomsky being the most distinguished, who think a fair and just form of Z possible but tragically betrayed. Perhaps Gurvitz is of that mind. If so,he is wrong. But if he is ready to report on the reality of the Zionist project as it put into effect day after day I very much value him.

  9. annie on February 8, 2019, 10:52 am

    The normalization of Jewish supremacy made sure that Jewish liberal parties would pay a high political price for accepting Israeli Palestinians as partners. It also radicalized many Israeli Palestinian activists. As a result, in a massive own goal, the Joint List refused to sign a votes-sharing agreement with Meretz in 2015. Three years later, the Nationality Law – the epitome of the process of Jewish supremacy legitimization – made the situation even worse.

    i’m a little confused how this works, the vote sharing. wouldn’t it create the opportunity for the possibility of another leftist seat in the knesset? and if meretz doesn’t get enough votes to be in the knesset, isn’t this ultimately a detriment for the joint list? how is not sharing an “own goal”?

    • Danaa on February 9, 2019, 6:03 pm

      Here is a recap of recent polling in Israel. Doesn’t look good for the Arab Israeli parties…

      https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/elections/joint-gantz-lapid-slate-would-overtake-netanyahu-oust-meretz-poll-shows-1.6916361

      Gruvitz comes from the direction of Meretz, not Balad. As a member of meretz (cf. remnant of the israeli “left”) obviously he preferred the vote sharing because, back in 2015, it could have garnered another seat or two for either Meretz or the Joint List. Since he believes – as he would – that meretz gives Arab israelis the best chance of becoming equal citizens, he’d consider the loss of even one seat a detriment.

      At the time, Balad vetoed the vote sharing because zionist liberal is still zionist (ie, they still believe israel can be a “mostly” jewish state even if not THE Jewish state). Perhaps in another universe – say the one Rabin lived in, Palestinians israeli parties could tacitly, if not overtly, prop up a minority left government. That, however is not likely to happen anytime again, in any future we can see.

      Balad in particular would view supporting meretz as just anothert lipstick on a pig, since meretz’s entire existence is predicated on “gilding the lily ” of the pretend democracy israel presents to the world.

      I disagree with Yossi calling it an “own goal” since in retrospect the jewish Nationality law was passed easily, and one or two additional “left leaning” seats (who would have presumably voted against such law) would not have made any difference to the outcome. More likely, it was Balad that read the situation correctly, even if that is a rather nihilistic viewpoint. IOW, a little more or little less “left soup” only helps israel’s image PR, even as the country is firmly marching towards its own sunset as the religious/zealous marches right, complete with its “zieg heil” meme universe.

      There is a danger balad will be prevented from voting, in which case most Arab parties may boycott the elections. Many palestinians would welcome this scenario since at least it would show israel in all its true naked reality as a supremacist state (which it is). And one that’s rapidly becoming theocratic too.

      The Indians have learned the hard way that smoking a peace pipe with white men leaders who tell mostly lies, only helps usher in the deadly reality that was in store for them all along. Now many in the Arab israeli population feel that smoking the peace pipe with the likes of meretz (which whispers sweet nothings in their ear about “equality” etc) is akin to accepting a pipe dream.

      So that’s the nihilistic view – Israel has a meeting with destiny of its own making. Nothing will change that. Might as well hurry it along…….

      PS of course, it is in the nature of the “left” anywhere to hope against hope. So Gurvitz sometimes speaks as if he believes there was any real hope for any outcome other than the present one. Reminds me a bit of the American left. If one is cocooned within it, things look hopeful – somehow, Bernie will be the candidate and will win the presidency. Somehow the Deep State will allow that to happen. Somehow the democrat party will not be as craven as it’s always been. Somehow ponies and rainbows will rain upon us all. Me, I support everyone who agitates for good things because hope helps lower the blood pressure.

      • echinococcus on February 10, 2019, 12:04 am

        Danaa, thank you for the clear sight and clear thinking.

        My only remark is re irrational hope. Yes, it may lower blood pressure but a series of well-documented public health studies show that it channels a lot of patients away from necessary treatment, to snake oil.

Leave a Reply