In a recent article, Alistair Crooke quotes former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas, who observes that Israel is in early stages of a civil war between the secular, modern Israel and the “Jewish-supremacist, ultranationalist” theocratic Israel. The vision of Israel cherished by each side is very different, and each side is increasingly unable to grant the other legitimacy of argument.
Israel was and remains held together by fear and hate of a common enemy. This condition is predictable for any nation at war, so predictable it leads to widely-accepted revisionist history that suggests politicians will indeed predictably seek war to prevent internal political collapse.
The current MICIMATT plans, outlines and demands a US-initiated war with Russia and China as the new normal. Israel, to normalize itself as a Zionist “democracy,” requires constant and ultimately complete destruction of its non-Jewish neighbors and residents. As national raison d’etre, living for war, which is to say, living for the state, is politically, economically and socially counterproductive. To put it a different way, living for war, committing all you have to the health of the state, for most of us is a sure path to a Hobbesian life – solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.
Crooke draws a parallel to the early stages of civil war in the United States, a popular topic today among mainstream and independent media alike. Today, governors, attorneys general and secretaries of state continue to find new ways to express their sovereignty within the federation. Societal and economic divisions between urban and rural America continue to grow and a great many people – on both sides of this division – increasingly refuse to obey government authorities, not because they are rugged individualists, but because they simply feel that their government is illegitimate.
States are leading the way – often with power in mind, rather than liberty. California and New York are interested in acquiring continued tax revenues from those who have left the state. This is nothing if not an expression of state power, an assertion of “their” laws on “their” citizens. Whether these laws will ultimately conflict with the 14th Amendment, or other parts of the Constitution is not clear, but one wonders if soon, the federal Constitution will even be viewed as relevant.
Hellbound and Down 