Kahane won
Seems to me that Zionism as a movement is entering into a phase one could consider the 'end game'. In terms of foreign policy, Israel has been in Moshe Dayan's proposed 'Mad Dog' mode for some time now. Yet as recently as ten years ago, on the Israeli left some sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and enthusiasm for the two state solution could still be found. But with the march of the Far Right into Israeli mainstream political discourse, those who favour wholesale 'transfer' (to the 'East'?) of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs alike are getting the upper hand and the road to a Final Naqba seems to have been paved by hard-line Zionists.
By Gideon Levy
[Emph. is mine]
Rabbi Meir Kahane can rest in peace: His doctrine has won. Twenty years after his Knesset list was disqualified and 18 years after he was murdered, Kahanism has become legitimate in public discourse. If there is something that typifies Israel's current murky, hollow election campaign, which ends the day after tomorrow, it is the transformation of racism and nationalism into accepted values.
If Kahane were alive and running for the 18th Knesset, not only would his list not be banned, it would win many votes, as Yisrael Beiteinu is expected to do. The prohibited has become permitted, the ostracized is now accepted, the destestable has become the talented - that's the slippery slope down which Israeli society has skidded over the past two decades.
There's no need to refer to Haaretz's startling revelation that Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman was a member of Kahane's Kach party in his youth: This campaign's dark horse was and is a Kahanist. The differences between Kach and Yisrael Beiteinu are minuscule, not fundamental and certainly not a matter of morality. The differences are in tactical nuances: Lieberman calls for a fascist "test of loyalty" as a condition for granting citizenship to Israel's Arabs, while Kahane called for the unconditional annulment of their citizenship. One racist (Lieberman) calls for their transfer to the Palestinian state, the other (Kahane) called for their deportation.
[Editor's question to Jewish Israelis: are they not aware that once a "test of loyalty" is in place for Israeli Arabs that the logical extension of such a policy will be to require a "test of loyalty" for Jewish Israelis too? That the "test of loyalty" may soon transmogrify into a "test of loyalty to Lieberman"? That in a Liberal Democracy it is a fundamental right of citizens do disagree, even completely and wholeheartedly, with the policies of the State? That such opposition is part of the democratic process?]
Now the instigator of the new Israeli racism will apparently become the leader of a large party once again in the government. Benjamin Netanyahu has already pledged that Lieberman will be an "important minister" in his government. If someone like Lieberman were to join a government in Europe, Israel would sever ties with it. If anyone had predicted in Kahane's day that a pledge to turn his successor into an important minister would one day be considered an electoral asset here, they would have been told they were having a nightmare.
But the nightmare is here and now. Kahane is alive and kicking - is he ever - in the person of his thuggish successor. This is not just a matter of disqualifying Yisrael Beiteinu; it is not even a matter of this party's growing strength to terrifying proportions, becoming the fulcrum that will decide who becomes prime minister. This is a matter of legitimization. All society bears responsibility for it.
Kahane was ostracized; Lieberman is a welcome guest in every living room and television studio. Imagine: Ehud Barak does not rule out a coalition with him; Uzi Landau, considered a "democrat," is now Lieberman's number two; a former senior ambassador and a retired police major general also adorn the list. Did we know that Israel was being represented in Washington by an avowed racist in the person of Daniel Ayalon? Did we know that former Border Police chief and deputy police commissioner Yitzhak Aharonovich was one, too? They have come out of the closet, these racists, breaking out of the heart of the establishment to the despicable right, and the attitude toward them has not changed a bit.
Lieberman and his soldiers are borne on the tides of hatred for Arabs, hatred of democracy and the rule of law, and the stink of nationalism, racism and bloodthirstiness. These have turned, horrifically, into the hottest electoral assets on the market. Like all others of his political ilk, he cynically fans these base urges, particularly among the weaker classes, the rejected, the poor and the immigrants. But not just there. Many young people, among them brainwashed soldiers, will give him their vote, and no one ostracizes them. He chose an easy, relatively weak target, Israel's Arabs, and sets his supporters on them. But his doctrine has seeped in much deeper than that.
Lieberman is the voice of the mob, and the mob craves hatred, vengeance and bloodshed. A useless war in which hundreds of children were killed was received here sympathetically, if not happily. The parties from the right and center have tried to disqualify the Arab parties; these lists are also excluded ahead of time in every political calculation. And Arab students cannot rent an apartment.
When the intifada of Israel's Arabs breaks out here one day, we will know whom to blame - those who criminally incited against them and, no less, those who turned this incitement into something acceptable and legitimate. This cancerous growth has spread to all parts of society; it remains only to issue a desperate last call: Keep away from this abomination. Anything but Yisrael Beiteinu, lest it really become Israel, our home.
2 Comments:
I think the origin of the problem, goes back to Ben Gurion, and his disdain for "universal values," as seperation of church and state, one man one vote, Bill of Rights, and constitutional law, while championing nationalism.
I think when you argue with Zionists, you should ask why they oppose these values when they speak of Israel?
Some as Bacon Eater have these values when talking about the US or Canada, but not Israel.
"I think when you argue with Zionists, you should ask why they oppose these values when they speak of Israel?"
They would deny it: it's a false dichotomy in their minds; Israel is for Jews, stupid. They can't see how that could be undemocratic. Milosevic's followers couldn't see that either when they were building their 'Serbs only' Greater Serbia.
"Some as Bacon Eater have these values when talking about the US or Canada, but not Israel."
Same problem: Special Status. To be fair to Bacon, he doesn't like Arabs or Muslims in Canada or the US either. He's a more consistent type of racist (lol).
Post a Comment
<< Home