Israel isn’t Real: The Exposed Will-to-be of the Lobby Dependent State

Colin Liddell

Let me be very clear here: I like the Jews and I like Israel. I especially like the fact that the state of Israel was essentially a colonial state founded at the very time (1948-1967) when the tide of history was flowing most strongly against colonialism. That almost puts it next to Rhodesia in my holy pantheon of based, un-PC states. But unfortunately, like Rhodesia, there has always been a sense that Israel is ultimately doomed.

OK, right now it has a sizeable nuclear arsenal and the support of the World’s only superpower, while the rest of the Middle East is cucked or in chaos. But the long-term trends are against it. It really was a mistake putting it where they did–in the heart of Islamic civilisation.

Israel Islam World Map Crop

A poor appreciation of geopolitical Feng Shui.

Because of this enormous initial mistake, the state of Israel has had to rely increasingly on powerful lobbying in the West. But the problem with lobbying is that you have to keep it low profile, behind the scenes, and in the shadows. Israel did a good job at this for many decades. But, as the internal contradictions of Israel’s existence increasingly bite, it has had to lean more and more heavily on this lobby stick:

“Please, Goyim, can you invade Iraq for me?” “Please Goyim can you put Hezbollah on your terrorist list?” “Please Goyim can you kill Qaddafi for me?” “Please, Goyim, can you foment an uprising against the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt?” “Please, Goyim, can you get rid of Assad for me?” “Please, Goyim, can you do something about Iran?” etc., etc.

The paradox of power, however, is that the more you are forced to use it, the more you are liable to lose it; and something similar is now being seen with regard to Israel’s lobbying power. In particular it is becoming too well known, practically a meme now, which is not healthy for something that feeds on the public’s ignorance and breathes the air of smoke-filled rooms.

roger-waters-e1441986366997

Criticised Israel. Probably a Nazi.

First there was the BDS movement, which was taken up, among others, by Roger Waters of Pink Floyd fame. You can be sure that the entire Left now see Israel in the terms framed by this essentially anti-colonialist and anti-White impulse.

Then it was “political realists,” like Nigel Farage  who recently matter-of-factly referred to the Jewish lobby and immediately provoked a Streisand Effect response that just spread the meme far and wide. If Farage is saying this, we know that Trump and others are at least thinking it.

Now, even sympathetic Judeophiles are jumping on board, with the revelation that Prince Charles is more than a little aware of how the Jewish lobby has been working all these years. That should open plenty of eyes.

The revelation comes in a letter to his now deceased friend Laurens van der Post, recently published by the Daily Mail, in which the Prince writes:

“I now appreciate that Arabs and Jews were all a Semitic people originally and it is the influx of foreign, European Jews (especially from Poland, they say) which has helped to cause the great problems.”

Even though the letter dates from 1986, it serves the function of once again underlining how vital the Israeli lobby is to the existence of Israel; and, by so doing, reminding the World that Israel is not a state like any other, but one that requires a constant effort of will, exercised in halls of power across the World, in order to exist. It exists, so to speak, “at a stretch.”

Charles in Arab Dress

Charles having a grand old time with his Arab pals.

The more that people dwell on this, the more cramped become those muscles expanded in the effort to maintain Israel.

This situation is not unlike the last attempt to insert an alien entity into the Middle East, the noble Crusades of revered memory. That too required constant lobbying by powerful groups in the West, until people simply lost interest and allowed the states or states created by the Crusades to swing in the inhospitable wind.

The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem existed from 1099 to 1187, a period of 88 years. Israel, founded in 1948, may surpass this figure but one wonders by how many years.

Support us on Patreon and Hatreon

7 comments

  • A few thoughts:

    (1) In the long run, the real predicament for Israel is not the increasing conspicuousness of its influence operations, but the dire and vehement extent of opposition Israel truly faces in the world, which that conspicuousness indicates. None of the Sunni powers currently cooperating with Israel are likely long-term partners. They may turn on Israel; they may be overthrown. The Vatican’s hostility to Zionism is so durable it may be the final vestige of pre-Vatican II policy. The US is feckless and declining, as are diaspora Jewish communities. Majority public feeling throughout the EU and FSU is solidly and consistently anti-Israel. The Muslim world needn’t even be discussed in this regard.
    (2) Despite that: what’s more real than a constant effort of will? The premise that Israel depends on such an effort doesn’t uphold the conclusion that Israel isn’t real. The Roman Empire is long dead and gone, but can hardly be called unreal even today. I’d even go so far as to say (and I speak from experience) that Israel is one of, if not the only country in the world where Nietzschean relativism even just faintly approaches consistency with a mass/collective ethos.
    (3) A theory: the leaking of Charles’ letter was calculated to provoke the predictable Jewish reaction, as part of a typical psyop intended to finally and utterly normalize a certain tenor of discourse around this issue, with the ultimate aim of obtaining a resolution to the conflict that would be anathema to anyone right of Meretz in Israeli politics, as it would entail the appointment of some myriad of limp-dicked international organizations as arbiters of the Jews’ national security. It didn’t work at the Wannasee Conference and in the long run, if they fall for it, it won’t work out for Israel any better than it did for Yugoslavia. But the idea that the royal family has no real power, and has been reduced to bitching in private correspondence about the Zionists lording it over them, is sophomoric stuff.
    (4) Prince Charles’s sentiments in this 1986 letter are no surprise. He may indeed be a philosemite, but so far as I am aware, there’s no obvious basis for calling him one, unless by semite we mean primarily Muslim Arabs, with whom he has indeed been quite openly sympathetic over the years (with the notable exception of a certain unfortunate Mr. Fayed). Furthermore, the sympathies of certain members of the royal family with Nazi Germany during the interwar period are at this point a matter of historical record. And really, what was more distinctive of Nazism, and central to it, than anti-semitism? British royals complaining about the Israel lobby is a bit like Harvey Weinstein complaining about the NRA.
    (5) The alleged epic power of the Israel Lobby, and the alleged liability one takes on by naming it above the volume of a hoarse whisper, is pedestrian wisdom. What we never (truly, never) hear in these discourses is the simple Newtonian possibility of a two-way street: that in order to mitigate formidable outside meddling in their affairs, the Israelis are leveraging the inertia of the Western democracies exactly like other interest groups and foreign actors.
    (6) Zionist interests are indeed powerful in the capitals of the great powers—the question is, relative to what? If we measure by anecdote, by spending power determined or surmised, or by the extent to which a given polity may’ve exerted itself in a manner apparently commensurate with long-term Israeli planning, then we’re only getting a faint indication. What do I mean? Well, lots of people enjoy influence, have money, etc. The real question is, what is power? Because if you have to lobby for it, then to some extent you’re a supplicant, jockeying for a proportion of something diffuse and ephemeral that’s maintained more effectively and in greater concentrations by others. To wit, the English royals are some of the only ones anywhere in Europe who survived every post-1789 convulsion with not only their titles and their enviable access to public resources, but their heads. If we want to talk about clandestine conspiracies, presumably Charles et al have some connections, some long-term designs that they doubtlessly share, quite of their own volition, with fellow elites. What those designs are, are as well known as they are easily surmised from the public utterances of the royals themselves. In my humble but dogmatic opinion it would be foolish to assume that the long-term interests of Jewish nationalism, or of the common, religiously believing Jew to maintain his distinct identity, enjoy pride of place in this schema—or that they even factor into it at all. More likely they represent a particularly stubborn speed bump en route to its fruition.

    Like

    • Like the Jews? Please consider this:
      . Morris Dees
      Harvey Weinstein
      Franz Boas
      Mortimer Halpern
      Emanuel Celler
      Maurice Bloomfield
      Nathan Glazer
      David Susskind
      Mark Rudd
      Ted Gold
      Jane Alpert
      Paul Berman
      Henrietta Rothschild
      Edward Sapir
      Barbara Boxer
      Melville Herskovits
      David Greenglass
      Sam Green
      Bill Siegel
      Terry Robbins
      Diana Oughton
      Katherine Boudin
      Bob Alpert
      John Silber
      Woody Allen
      Mark Halperin
      George Soros
      John Lasseter
      Abe Foxman
      Jerry Seinfeld
      Deborah Lipstadt
      Norman Mailer
      Saul Alinsky
      Betty Friedan
      Mark Helprin
      Allen Ginsberg
      A. M. Rosenthal
      Allard Lowenstein
      William Shawn
      Chuck Schumer
      Perry Stein
      Lawrence Rosenthall
      Laura Greenblatt
      Jason Kessler
      Jamie Weinstein
      Yair Rosenberg
      Sonia Pressman
      Gloria Steinem
      Andrew Sorkin
      David Rothkopf
      Reuben Brigeton
      Michael Chabon
      Julius Krein
      Ayelet Waldman
      Simon Shauma
      Irwin Stelzer
      Lisa Friedman
      Rosalind Helderman
      Jamie Dimon
      Dean Skedos
      Sheldon Silver
      David Wildstein
      David Greffen
      Tom Haydon
      Alfred Knopf
      Ellen Weintraub
      Eliot Cohen
      Ezekiel Emanuel
      Kahlen Rosenblatt
      John Oakes
      Andrew Stein
      Dan Simon
      Jeffrey Zucker
      Anne Ondre
      Robert Shapiro
      Annika Hernroth-Rlothstein
      Julie Eilperin
      Carl Bernstein
      Alex Rosenberg
      Howard Finkelstein
      Noam Chomsky
      Nick Schifirin
      David Rubenstein
      Brian Aherne
      Jeffrey Goldberg
      Adam W. Goldberg
      Noah Rothman
      Abe Greenwald
      John Podhoretz
      Richard Cohen
      Susan Sontag
      Jon Ossoff
      David Corn
      Tommy Chook
      Allan Lichtman
      David Bondeman
      Steve Rattner
      Hilda Hershkoviz
      Michael Lerner
      Jonathan Greenblatt
      Noah Berlatsky
      Joel Finkelstein
      Lloyd Blankfein
      Saul David
      Julie Adams
      Ethan Berman
      Irwin Seltzer
      Howard Millstein
      Jared Bernstein
      Rod Rosenstein
      David Rothkopf
      Amy Goldstein
      Jennifer Steinhauer
      Uri Friedman
      Yuval Levin
      Walter Isaacson
      Jason Horovitz
      Stu Rothenberg
      Jared Bernstein
      Yuval Levin
      William Kristol
      Sidney Blumenthal
      Arthur Rosenthal
      Ben Shapiro
      Arthur O. Sulzberger
      David Goldman
      Hadas Gold
      Richard Rothstein
      Philip Roth
      Michael Signer
      Donna Zuckerberg
      Michelle Goldberg
      Noah Feldman
      Jonathan Bernstein
      Rod Rosenstein
      David Brooks [sic]
      George Weinberg
      Gerhard Weinberg
      Norton Mezvinsky
      Josua Green
      Stanley Cohen
      Michael Lesher
      George Weinberg
      Matvei Berman
      Yakov Rappaport
      Mark Berman
      David Edelstein
      David Rosenberg
      Ethan Epstein
      Linda Blumberg
      Pearlstein (?)
      Heidi Beirich
      Max Boot
      Jed Sundenj
      Yehuday Finkelstein
      Lorraine Silverstein
      Michael Getler
      Samuel Rosen
      Norma Eisen
      Glenn Greenwald
      David Lowenthal
      Zalman Shapiro
      Abe Feinberg
      Paul Greenberg
      Jacob Blumenfeld
      Ken Stern
      Richard Blumnthal
      Rachel Cohen
      Michelle Friedland
      Ken Stern
      Rachel Maddow
      Barbra Steisand
      Peter Wehner
      Amy Bishop
      Stanley Greenberg
      Ari Schulman
      Michael Isaacson
      Hayley Greftman
      Jennifer Weiner
      Roberta Kaplan
      Rob Stein
      David Frum
      Michael Goldberg
      Howard Milstein
      David Miliband
      Jennifer Rubin
      Sarah Botstein
      Norton Simon
      Laura Loomer
      Jonathan Lerner
      Ethan Epstein
      Timothy Naftali
      Ronald Lauder
      David Cohen
      Michael Bloomberg
      Michael Mark Cohen
      Jesse Singal
      Eric Heilberg
      Annie Leibovitz
      Stephen Greenblatt
      Noah Rothman
      Michael Dominy
      Abraham Denmark
      David Rubenstein
      Gary Cohn
      David Shulkin
      Murray Pulaski
      Peter Wehner
      Amy Bishop
      Stanley Greenberg
      Ari Schulman
      Michael Isaacson
      Hayley Greftman
      Jennifer Weiner
      Roberta Kaplan
      Rob Stein
      David Frum
      Michael Goldberg
      Howard Milstein
      Miliband
      Jennifer Rubin
      Sarah Botstein
      Norton Simon
      Laura Loomer
      Jonathan Lerner
      Ethan Epstein
      Timothy Naftali
      Ronald Lauder
      David Cohen
      Michael Bloomberg
      Michael Mark Cohen
      Jesse Singal
      Eric Heilberg
      Annie Leibovitz
      Stephen Greenblatt
      Noah Rothman
      Michael Dominy
      Abraham Denmark
      David Rubenstein
      Gary Cohn
      David Shulkin
      Philip Rahv
      Norbert Schlei
      Henry Kissinger
      Mark Halprin
      many others just as bad

      Like

  • Pingback: Little and Harry | Utter Contempt

  • sri lanka and ethiopia aint muslim.

    Like

  • I was talking to a married couple with three kids recently. They bought a flat in a new development in East Jerusalem 8 years ago. Then the settlement freeze happened. After Trump’s election construction finally got going and they thought they could start renting it out last June or so, but all sorts of things happened and it’s still held up. They live in the shittiest part of Israel called the ‘Mercaz’ where the weather is permanently humid, everything is ugly, but most of the jobs are. Both of them work to pay off the mortgage on *their* flat, plus the rent where they live. Basically, their whole life plan has basically been ruined by a decision made in Washington.

    Now, I don’t expect you to be sympathetic. There’s a lot worse sob stories out there and, after all, you’re not Jewish. However, what I can guarantee to you is that 90% of Israelis do sympathize with them. No-one except some far, far Left clowns objects to building housing units in Jerusalem or believes that any part of Jerusalem could be given up in any hypothetical peace deal. This is the issue on which there is the greatest degree of cross-party agreement in Israel.

    Yet, somehow Israel can get America to invade Libya (for what?), invade Iraq (to strengthen Iran), put Hizb’Allah on a terror list (because it commits terrorism?), ‘foment an uprising against the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt?’ (how awful), ‘get rid’ of Assad (I guess we’re still waiting for that one) and ‘do something’ about Iran (does roll over count as doing something) and, if we leave the relatively placid waters of this site and go farther afield into the alt-right, overthrow the government of Ukraine and any number of things with tangential if any relation to Israel at all, but can’t achieve basic things that almost all Israelis agree on and which are, viewed from a sober perspective, pathetic even to ask for, like building houses in the capital city. I call bullshit.

    Like

  • (((They))) bit off more than they can chew, I say let us let them suffocate on it – no further action needed

    Like