Skip to content or view screen version

Does Israel Have a Right to Exist?

Internationalist Observer | 06.12.2013 19:00 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Palestine | World

This question has been asked many times, and more often than not in a merely selective interest rather than from an absolute position. By its own definition Israel is a state entity and therefore it cannot have any of the qualities of a natural person. Material constructs do not bear absolute rights. These are singular to the natural being – nature has a right to exist – and can only be lost but not gained by force – no conqueror of nature can obtain them by taking them away from it. The wording of the question is expressing a conceptual aberration on the matter of hierarchy analysis and it should be rephrased according to the situation in which it might appear. But that it is being asked in this specific form indicates a distortion of meaning within the concept of statehood: There are states which are nothing but functions of other states. The false totality bites itself. Certainly this is a historical footnote on the absurdity of trying to avoid Anarchy. In the misguiding ideology the planet is expected to burden itself with the failing hierarchies of the state, even if they would break it. Does Israel have a purpose on the way out of this capitalist misery or is it no better than the false totality statehood brought about?

When the perspective of the Palestinian issue as it developed over the 20th century is taken, Zionism is usually being named as the driving force of the land conflict. That is referencing the development preceding state installation, precisely the ideological movements in Europe which caused the imperialist powers at the collapse of colonialism to create or restore Israel in the place of its historic expulsion. There was an idea that one restoration of unjust loss could inspire others, such as the expulsion of the Jews was just one case in a series of atrocities inflicted by the historical Roman empire across Europe pending to be finally healed after its formal abolition a century earlier. And there was a feeling that the collapse of the established system was the appropriate time for it. But that impulse underwent the same abuse as the local romantic tendencies and was broken in authoritarian assimilation, and in the statehood period of Zionism has only served as an empty excuse for the latter.

This particular loose nerve has triggered crass opposition from many due to its ideological shortcut: There is a breakdown line beyond which an authoritarian state can no longer ideologically justify itself but the self-betrayed collaborator still can. And that means the trauma of Zionism having denied the Anarchist ideals of its roots in order to trade into the lies of the states is perpetuating every negative intention it sees against its special role with full force against everyone else. This ideological reflex certainly has no right to exist, not even if it were not to collide with new interests arisen in the meantime. Beyond that it remains a matter of research to determine what Zionism is in terms of science. It is proof that no assignment of statehood, and be it in form of the most destructive weapons at the most irrational cost, can functionally compensate for the loss of self-esteem resulting from a deviation from Anarchy. Quite the contrary, once any agreement with a state is made on a basis of moral equivalence with the natural person, as opposed to the regulation of a construct inferior to the natural person, such loss is set to occur. And if a political movement risen to undo injustice of empire does not remain focused on the moral inferiority of imperialism it is losing its purpose and in the worst case reproducing its cause.

When the Zionists look back at the 19th century, beyond the petty rivalries there is the pressing memory that other encounters with empires ended at better conditions. If the purpose of Israel is to enable the Jews to exist outside any empire and threat or influence directly or indirectly resulting from it, then the current implementation has miserably failed. In fact the friction it generates with the flow of time which unavoidably brings in other people with their own interests in the meantime indicates that the existing entity is little more than or nothing but a function of empire, like the illusion of a rainbow from natural light hitting an useless chunk of litter with no actual recessive humidity in the atmosphere. It appears to be produced to crudely mimic what it would leave to be desired, but it is not a sign of something new appearing on the horizon of hopefulness. Yet it is self-evident that empire has absolutely no right to exist, so any construct that has can only do so because of being something else than a function of empire, or even being everything else than that.

The Israel that would have any emancipatory purpose to end the legacy of empire forever does currently not exist, and if it would it certainly would be as vulnerable to it as anyone. The historical frame of reference of the newly arrived at the small pathway between the two big continuous land agglomerations of the metacontinent is that period of European history when the aftershocks of the collapse of the Roman empire which left no one within its reach unhurt dominated all attempts of healing, and the restoration of Anarchy was hampered by inheritance rivalries among the rubble. Even when the expelled Jews obtained in exile what they desired, the end of the Roman empire, that did not imply a capacity to make something of the unconscious development which would be useful to prevent an even more precarious situation. Had the refugees been able to clean up the remainder of empire together with the natives it would have effectively prevented the resurrection of imperialism. At least after Rome was overrun for good, no further empire is possible without an external reference.

The Zionist of these days is the Babylonian captive of these who arm him. And it is a grotesque resurrection, since in the meantime the empire that started the smallest lasted the longest and is now all gone, and the latest one is a secondary aberration resulting only from a descendant role. The European colonialists that became Americans have a contradictory relationship to their cultural ancestors, on one hand they rely on them for their identity, on the other they abuse them to compensate themselves for the unpleasant effects of their infantile role. They do even have difficulties to realise how stupid it is to spy against everyone else and claim independence at the same time. Not just that it is a violation of foreign independence but it also turns back against perpetrators who totally depend on their crime. The lethal farce of an empire that keeps a hurt Zionism in prolonged trauma can only be what it is due to the destructive force of technology. When it has to compete on an equal footing, the spying-based imperialism of this fraudulent time is politically helpless.

It is said that antisemitism as it molded into industrial society is the insurrection surrogate of the stupid, not only indifferently stupid but criminally stupid, but it being the trigger which initiated the Zionist movement it must be asked which are the specific forms that make it so dangerous – if it is only an empty rumour then where would be the danger in it? The answer of course is that the disinformation is based on the deliberate distortion of information, and that the rise of antisemitism coincides with that of spying efforts. The forgery is not possible without the theft of the original. In the colonial empires it took the form of forgery of self-presentation and identity and that so-called "black propaganda" was specifically tailored against individual targets of spying. The result was not only mass death from efforts to get rid of the legacy apparatus but also from ideological irritations due to the propaganda, with the latter coming with even more dynamic potential of escalation. Where ever this phenomenon occurs – the unsolicited totalitarian mimicry – it is of equal historical risk as in that instance.

It is this imperialist tactic which led to the conclusion that the situation left behind by the Roman empire was no longer bearable. Where it repeats, in the spying scandals of the present, where apparently all states seem to collaborate against any blow of common sense that could break the ice of their accumulated guilt, it has the potential to override all other historic evaluations: When the most heinous element of antisemitism, the personally targeted forgery that is only possible on the basis of spying, becomes reemployed or is already so against anyone, specifically any subgroup or parallel culture, then the consequences are no different. Such behaviour will ultimately harm the human consensus so much that it must be avoided at any condition in the first place. And if that is not enough and identity theft takes place nevertheless there must be immediate consequences to avoid the resulting drama. It is natural that no one is interested to experience character assassination misnamed after its targets, and of course the "Golden Rule" fully applies.

Any state which comes to mimic in any form the efforts that produced the “Zionist Protocols” against anyone must be destroyed not only for the justice of the persons but even more so due to the wider consequences of the circulation of contaminated materials. The hypothesis that this could be the defining theme of the current spying scandal, that the theft of data by the North Americans and their accomplices has followed the pattern of character assassination against humans, as opposed to one of pure rollback efforts against rival entities, bears large weight because of its lethal implications. Once it is to be considered a standing fact that the purpose of the spying followed that ideological pattern more than merely indifferent economic forces, this fundamentally changes the assessment of the evil in its intentions – and more than that, the choice of consequences. It changes the apparatus which produced such a catastrophe and all its derivatives into something that cannot have any right to exist.

It is this negative definition which does produce the most clarity for the concept: Once the character-assassination-bent spy apparatus has historically deprecated forever its ambition for a relative right to exist, any failure or delay of implementation can only result in equally brutal blowback and in the worst case character-assassinating mimicry thereof. The depreciation of the right to exist does not necessarily immediately transform into a cessation of existence, but the resulting discrepancy remains the source of an escalating spill of blood such as in the belated revolution in Russia. Had the apparatus behind the “Zionist Protocols” been destroyed earlier, how much killing could have been avoided? It remains the single most urgent issue on the horizon of the young millennium to find how this legacy can be cleanly cut off the life of the species, even more than the threat of industrial capitalism is to the planet, because it is hampering any solution for the latter.

The deprecated right to exist of a group of perpetrators is a matter of fact that can be observed with the unarmed eye either directly or from its visible consequences. There would not be so much indifferent violence if it was not functioning as a mirror to enhance the violent pattern of a system literally cannibalising on these who are not interested to participate in it. How that demon of material force that is the spying will be exterminated is a matter of current necessity that cannot be left to time. And the comfortable temptation of taking props for the own leniency is a murderous deception which can only multiply the death toll. The more is becoming known about the spying of the regimes and their malicious intentions to employ it to poison the culture or subculture of any natural person or group thereof, the more it leaves of an idea what is going to be both necessary and suitable to end the assassinations of bodies and characters.

Since such spying is the most lethal symptom of an overdrawn balance of existence, and did also attack the entities of claims on timeless morals before it came to harass someone and everyone, it is there where the cut must be made. Caesares esse caedendos. At which extent this implies Israel more than any other country is a technicality depending on the details of the collaboration. It might only be one percent or it might be more or less of a share of the whole which will only become known exactly when the entire apparatus is carefully disassembled in an Anarchist environment. Any interest to achieve a clean balance of existence cannot prevail in merely local conflict. It is the military-industrial complex which has no right to exist, even the hardware is useless for benign applications. And the living interest to remain outside of any of its deceptive and ultimately lethal constructs mandates its end. Or else Israel does not repeat someone else´s history, but the farce is a repetition of its self-inflicted collaboration preceding the Roman expulsion.

Internationalist Observer