The nonsense about singling out Israel
In an article on Middle East Eye Ben White quotes the Board of Deputies of British Jews (who of course do not represent THE British Jews, as well as the Zentralrat der Juden in Germany):
any exceptional treatment of Israel, where Israel is uniquely subjected, among all the countries in the world, to hostile behaviours such as denial of its right to exist and boycotts“ is anti-Semitic.
It’s time to destroy the false logic of the „single out“ or „uniquely subjected“argument.
Of course Israel is not singled out but treated like any other racist, colonial country with affinity to fascism.
Also BDS is no singling out: it was practiced in the cases fascist Franco-Spain, Greece under probably fascist military junta and of course apartheid South Africa.
And boycott is practiced very normally from governments – against Russia, Iran, North Corea, before Cuba (mentioned without judgement whether correct or not).
So why do they claim such a nonsense?
It’s because they ignore the existence of the Palestinians, of a Palestinian people.
They see them as Arabs whom they see without any distinction, without culture printed through their own long regional history. This is quite easy for the zionists because jews themselves have no common history as a cultural entity. They are a religious denomination, declared from some crooked minded Europeans, especially Germans, as a race, which is also totally nonsense without any scientific base.
Underneath lies the mediaeval thought that nations are built by religions. The Frankish Empire embraced whole Western Europe with all their different peoples, languages and cultures, united only in belief. This on the base of the writings of the great philosopher Augustinus. His theory was about a development of history towards a christian world, which would mount in a state of God which would mean the end of history. A very stable idea. We find it in Hegels thoughts, copied by Karl Marx, up to Huntington and Fukuyama.
In a state built by religion of course only those have citizenship who share that religion. All others are ‚foreigners‘, either tolerated or fought. Also the European jews were either tolerated or fought and not accepted as citizens; but they were not the only ones. Bloody, cruel wars with the aim of extincion of those who would not surrender and proselyte were not only led on the way to christianize pagan Europeans, but also against religious groups declared as heretic. They had no citizenship so they were outlawed.
It’s easy to find this mediaeval thought in the dominating far right zionist ideology. In a jewish state no non-jew has citizenship, independent whether there was granted an israeli passport to him or not. A non jew, whether muslim, christian or any other, has to surrender under the jewish laws, to accept the jewish religion as the predominant, to get the gift of formal citizenship as a bureaucratic act. An act that can be revoked whenever the jewish government decides that it is not pleased with him anymore. The zionists are stuck in their mediaeval thought with the consequence that they treat any other denominations today like the jews in Western Europe were treated since hundreds of years ago.
It’s paradox that this thought shall be established in Palestine which was always an exception to this thought. As the holy land of jews, christians and moslems all three religions with their different denominations lived there together and built Palestine. Compare this with for instance Morocco or even Saudi Arabia. It’s obvious that Palestine has her own culture which strongly differs from other Middle Eastern cultures who in fact share nothing except language and belief. And sometimes not even that.
Meanwhile we live in completely different times. National states have developed in Europe and elsewhere and states which have been built by European colonialism on the blackboard, ignoring cultural and peoples borders, not seldom had to fight many difficulties because of that. Our international and peoples law and especially our human rights declaration grants freedom of religion and forbids any discrimination or even prosecution because of religious belief. Who wants to change this – except notorious religious extremists and sectarians, famous the blood thirsty IS, but also from hindu, christian and even buddhist side – and, yes, Israel?
Today it is simply against all worldwide accepted international laws, to establish a state based on religion. This because such a state not only breaks princips of democracy, the princip of One-Man-One-Vote, but also consequently leads to displacement of those with the ‚wrong‘ religion and replacing them with believers of the ‚right‘ – of course unacceptable. And a state that holds to this mediaeval idea of being built by religion singles herself out of world community.
But of course it also has consequences for the complex of ideas of such a state, too. A state that defines herself as built on a special religion also sees other states under the pretext of religion. This is at least a proto-fascist view because it ignores all the different cultures and identities of the peoples of all other states and sums them only under one allegedly prevailing ideology. Means, they do not only ignore the individual existence of Palestinians. They also ignore the existence of Libyans, Algerians, Iraqis, Syrians and so on. For them they are all just Arabs who in their opinion have a special regional religion which is islam, not willing to surrender under prevailing jewish religion and therefore hostile by itself – in the propagandistic term: anti-semitic (which is especially in this case a complete nonsense term as well). So for them it’s simply no problem to displace a whole people to regions where people with the same – hostile – religion live. One should not be too sure that this would only concern Palestinians.
But world is far away from mediaeval times. It is not worth to discuss ideas wiped away from developed mankind because of their inhuman effects. There have always been attempts to go back to an alleged golden past, most famous fascism of Italy with its fallback to Roman Empire or, today, the horrible IS movement and its partners with their fallback to an alleged time of Mohammad. They always ended in cruelty, abhorrence, blood and the swear of „never again“.
There is no singling out, no uniquely subjecting of Israel. At least as long as we keep and defend the only reliable measure that can bring enduring peace to international conflicts: the international and peoples law.