Deconstructing Zionism, Pt. II


that’s not real Zionism

(Part I here, Part III here)

People who mind their own business have the right to be left alone. The same is true with groups of people. Does Israel mind its own business? Well, what does that even mean?

Clearly, someone who is gravely threatened by another has the right to concern himself with that other party’s affairs, up to the point that doing so is liable to end the threat. But if someone is merely disliked by another—disdained, avoided, boycotted, denounced in purely subjective terms, or in objective ones that do not rise to the level of falsehood—then to concern oneself with that other party’s affairs goes far beyond just minding one’s own business.

Is Israel gravely threatened by anyone? Sure—we all know who. Does Israel limit itself to defending against those parties? Of course not. Through surrogates abroad (many of them billionaires, CEOs and the like) as well as directly through its agents, Israel is deeply involved in the domestic affairs not only of hostile nations but of numerous friendly ones. Through campaign finance, media coordination, and even blackmail and defamation of individual political opponents, Israel meddles in these countries’ democratic processes and violates the rights of citizens there to speak, associate, and politically organize. It has succeeded in placing anti-boycott laws on the books in two dozen U.S. states that impose unconstitutional conditions on government contractors. Its military tech complex is hitched to the U.S. deep state in ways that give Israel access to the sensitive data of millions of Americans. The Israeli army even maintains a troll unit dedicated to policing online content around the world. And just this month, Israel revoked a broadcasting license from a Christian TV station for violating its restrictions on proselytizing.

From all this activity, a picture emerges. Rather than just addressing grave threats, Israel opposes itself around the world to dislike of Israel. It literally opposes the right of individuals to dislike it, to vocally condemn its policies, and to refrain from doing business with it. And the Israeli government feels that Judaism is so fragile, and compares so unfavorably with competing faiths, that inside Israel those faiths must be censored, and Israeli Jews shielded from their ideas.

An Arab proverb has it that, “Where there is concession, there is strength.” Miserliness is a sign of insecurity. Like a man, a people that is mature and self-confident does not need to concern itself with the opinions of others. Like a man, a people with a clean conscience can withstand being reviled. A regime with honest motives can withstand criticism. But for some odd reason, 21st-century Israel increasingly cannot.

It is often said by Zionists that no real distinction exists between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. This is quite correct. Historian Tony Judt once called Israel “the country that wouldn’t grow up,” but the problem he identified is not limited to Zionism or Israel. For an ethnic Jew to marry out, attend a wedding in a church, or even flip through the New Testament out of curiosity, is something fraught with jaundice and shame. Religious Judaism takes the same attitude toward classical (Greco-Roman) learning.

A creed that imposes mandatory blind spots like these and enforces them with guilt over supposed betrayal of the dead is unworthy of free men, instead producing gangsters, avengers, and fanatical agnostics. It venerates the crypt at the crippling expense of the living. It is an overbearing parent from whom we never quite individuate. As Epictetus said, “It is the act of an uninstructed person to reproach others for his own misfortunes.” The stalking wolf of anti-Semitism, of Amalek, is our own shadow, which Zionist instruction has amplified rather than diminished, despite its promises of a “new Jewish man” and a “nation like all other nations,” propositions that have been conveniently shelved in favor of more breast beating, more Holocaust, more tattling to daddy America, and zero moral responsibility for the situation the country perennially finds itself in. Even the Israeli left takes cover by blaming the problem, essentially, on toxic masculinity, and on religion, as if coveting Arab cisterns was a religion.

In 17th-century Ukraine, Jewish men disinclined to study Talmud used to run away from the shtetl, accept baptism, and join the Cossack hordes. I don’t blame them for choosing freedom and adventure over compulsive routine, and passively awaiting redemption. That is what Zionism once represented. Yet today, the Jew, and the Jewish Israeli, is every bit the specially protected creature his forbear was in medieval Europe, unable to shake off the dust of centuries, and subjected to occasional massacres as a matter of course.

Where once the relationship of hofjude to crown was the thread by which the community’s safety swung, today the country is utterly dependent on billionaire surrogates abroad for political representation, defense procurement and market exposure. And what exactly is being marketed? Software and biomedical gadgetry, i.e., magic, not unlike the Golem, Shylock’s ducats, or the “Jews of Amsterdam” in One Hundred Years of Solitude. In short, Zionism has changed nothing fundamental about the Jewish position in the world, other than making us into fearful little policemen of Arabs—who retain all the initiative in the relationship because they have nothing left to lose, i.e., freedom. Regimes come and go, but the hofjude is forever. Independence—freedom—continually eludes us. Apparently, we don’t want it.

Like a man, there comes a time in the life of any ideology or regime when potentialities are null, and what you see is what you get. What we see with Zionism is a regime that cannot sustain itself without subjecting a foreign civilian population to permanent martial law. We see a government that feels the need to nudge its neighbors into permanent civil wars. We see constant, unending tension, recrimination, hostility and strife. We see a culture obsessed with victimhood, “remembrance,” and death. We see an ideology that must suppress criticism, that cannot abide any measure of dislike because its conscience is not clean—deep down, it understands that its orientation to the outside world is clandestine. Maybe these things are the fault of everyone except the Jews. Certainly that is what the Zionist movement now believes. But you’d have to be brainwashed to believe it.


26 thoughts on “Deconstructing Zionism, Pt. II

  1. Liquid Phosphex says:

    Rather than follow giants like Samson and Simon Wiesenthal, a lot of Jews feel that they have the right to engage in petty squabbles and petty acts of vengeance because it gives validation to their victimhood. All it does is create resentment and vindictiveness with no solution until it boils into bloodshed and any peaceful resolution is no longer possible. But this doesn’t validate terrorism by the Palestinians or by anyone else. Far from it. It demands that Justice be carried out with Truth, Reason, and the love of God and one’s neighbor.

    But what I see is a nation that just won’t let go of their resentment and refuses to stop using the Holocaust as a blunt weapon. Even Mossad knows it doesn’t take much to rile up Neo-Nazis in their echochambers, but it’s human nature to be short sighted and forgetful, which is why history repeats itself first as a tragedy and then as a farce. If there is any God-given divine justice in this world;

    מאיר כהנא נרקב בגיהינום עם היטלר

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Guy says:

    Question: are Denis Prager and Ben Shapiro, in your opinion, representative of religious Jews, or are they just secular Jews playing as religious to appeal to right wing American Christians. They both profess to be religious and have double standards for their acceptance of free speech when it comes to criticism of Jews. Meanwhile, all the non-media-personality Jews I know or have read, that are more concerned with the religious part of Judaism than just culturally identifying with ashkanazi Jews, don’t seem to be as sensitive to this and are on fact the most critical people of Jews outside of neo nazis.

    In your last article you were lamenting the fact that the heroes of modern Judaism are disappointing Jared kushners, I think a lot of westerners these days could say the same about their ethnic or religious groups though. The last “war hero” we had was Chris Kyle, and depending on who you believe (I’ve done zero research) he was a psychotic liar.


    • I think that Prager and Shapiro are characteristic of modern orthodoxy, which is basically a tri-state/Israel thing, i.e., orthodox Jews who keep kosher, pray daily, but don’t cover their hair (women) or don’t always wear a yarmulke (men). The may not be representative of that community (of which Jared Kushner is another public example) but they’re very characteristic of it, so I wouldn’t say they’re faking. You could analogize the modern orthodox to evangelicals: they profess their religion very strongly but the kids watch the Disney channel, the teenagers fool around with sex and drugs like secular kids, etc.


  3. gk1901 says:

    My only gripe with this article is the sentence:
    “We see a government that feels the need to nudge its neighbors into permanent civil wars”.

    Unless I misunderstood your meaning, I don’t think it’s quite accurate. It’s the same logical fallacy that many use when criticising Israel, the “exploitation = inception”.

    Sure, Israel does benefit tremendously from the current civil war in Syria and prior to that the one in Lebanon. But it does not mean that Israel *caused* this wars.

    Both Syria and Lebanon are artificial states with multiple people groups (18 in the case of Lebanon) are forced to live together predenting they all part of the same thing.

    It didn’t work for countless African countries, it didn’t work for Yugoslavia, it didn’t even work for Norway and Denmark when they were one Kingdom, so the ethnic conflicts that eventually broke out were inevitable.

    Israel, at worst could be said to have added more fuel to an already existing flame. Which is something I would personally argue does fall under the banner of “Israel minding it’s own bussiness”, as they use this tactic against countries that could have posed a much bigger threat to it if they were more united.

    That is just my own opinion, though.


    • That’s a fair criticism. But when you have so many enemies, so many potential enemies—so many fingers in the dyke, so to speak—then the question becomes, why TF does your dyke have so many holes in it? What is it about you? Viewed in that overall context, I think Israel’s intervention in Syria does becomes interesting, especially since there is indication that Israel has played a similar role in Libya over the past decade.

      As in Syria, yes—it’s reasonable for Israel to prevent Iran from gaining influence there. But again, in the context of such a small country having so many enemies and so many scattered interests, it becomes odd. So I’m asking, why do we as a people have such a unique sense of insecurity? What is it about us? The question is fairer at this point in history than it ever has been. And I’m pointing out that Zionism has not solved this. And neither will intervention in Syria, or any given country. A big part of the problem is psychological.

      By the way, I use the word “deconstruct” only because a commenter with whom I have occasional little flamewars over on Affirmative Right once claimed that I would never deconstruct Judaism or Zionism the way (he claims) I deconstruct white identity. So the title is tongue-in-cheek, but my criticism of Zionism here is actually constructive and coming from a well-meaning place. But it’s also a personal declaration of independence from the coercive and intellectually stultifying features of a thought-system I’ve felt beholden to at various times in my life, and obligated to go along with unquestioningly. So for me, that ends with this article. I don’t want any part in this unregenerate insecurity and blame of others for the Jews’ own problems. But hey, if someone somewhere is plotting to murder Jews, I hope the IDF greases them.


      • gk1901 says:

        why TF does your dyke have so many holes in it? What is it about you? such a small country having so many enemies and so many scattered interests.”

        Geopolitical and religous reasons.

        The Arab countries are obviously pissed off about Israel for what they view as land theft, for the millitary defeats Israel had caused them, and for how the so-called Nakba has filled their own countries with Palestinian refugees. As for countries that are not immidiate neighbors to Israel, sympathy exists for the Palestinians for religous reasons, as again, they also consicder this place holy for them, and thus, whoever stands for the Palestinians is in a way a beacon for all Muslims. Currently it’s the Iranians who have the spotlight as the saviors of Islam. It used to be Iraq. Before that, Egypt. Before that, Saudis. Ghadafi thought the Lybia could be this one day but he never posed a real threat. When the Mollah regime in Iran crumbles I gaurantee you the Turks will take their spot.

        It must be said that many Muslims view Israel almost like a re-run of the Crusades – a bunch of westerners coming to take their hoyl sites for themselves and change their way of lives. The Crusades are this sort of collective trauma for the Arab Muslims in a very simillar way to how the Holocaust is for the Jews, so it should be viewd in that context.

        So yeah, the short answer: Israel’s enemies are Israel’s enemies for Israel, or more simpely being there. I don’t think that saying that is “blaming others for Israel’s problems”. There’s a cultural, historic, national, ethnic and religous divide here that is the cause of all the problems on it’s own – it, and not the actions of any particular country.

        Yep, If we just packed out bags and left, everything will be alright*. But advocating such an act – which I’m not saying is what you are doing – is essentially giving up on Zionism completley.

        You’ve said that your criticism of Zionism is not a renouncement of it, that you only reject some aspects of it. However, the questions can posed can summed up with the shorter question of “why is Israel there in the first place”, which to me sounds like unapologetic Anti-Zionism, or worse: POST-ZIONISM.

        * until, off course, the question of “why were Jews kicked out of 109 countries” will rise again, and we’ll have to deal with again. You have already written an exellent piece of this topic, so now, given your major change of views, it would be interestign to know how you would revisit this article with your current look on things.


      • Your comment is only addressing Israel’s problems with the Arabs. My article addresses the Jews’ problems with the whole of the Islamic world and the West—especially the West. I refer to Israel’s extensive lobbying efforts (which go on in nearly every western country) to stifle legitimate democratic freedoms e.g., to boycott, to speak on college campuses, etc. Jewish oligarchs own the majority of information outlets in the United States. Israel has its agents and surrogates everywhere in the West, including some in quite high positions, e.g., Jared Kushner. And this phenomenon far predates Zionism, as I explained. The Praetorian Guard was founded by Jews, as was the Catholic Church. The figment of the wandering Jew is in the background of a lot of western history, and his influence is frequently malign, as in the example I gave of the hofjude, the best example of which is Rothschild. You can like this, dislike it, take it or leave it, but a due respect for truth requires that facts be faced.

        A people that feels the need to operate in this manner, that feels it has interests all over the world, not just financially or politically but in terms of how it is perceived by any given group of people anywhere, is fundamentally insecure on a psychological level that cannot truthfully be blamed on this or that temporal military threat from e.g., Iran or the Arabs.

        The problem I addressed in my earlier article (Achtung Juden) is essentially the same: Jewish psychology. I have not turned around and condoned any of what I critiqued there about anti-semitism. The only way my view has evolved is that I no longer ascribe the problems of Jewish psychology only to this or that faction within Judaism. The problem is with Judaism itself. It simply requires an Amalek. I am not against having a Hebrew national culture or Jewish self-defense or a self-defending Hebrew community in the Levant. I am against being willfully miserable. So you can free your mind or not. It’s none of my business. But living with this troubled psychology, wearing these precious, venerable and ancient blinders, is the price you pay to be special, chosen, venerable, ancient etc. Whether you want to continue to live with this neurosis is up to you, but an immanent, moral God, and the ancient tribe and its great literature and its modern state are not all going to disappear just because we decide to finally open our eyes.


  4. gk1901 says:

    (new thread cause for whatever reason I cannot reply to your latest comment)

    Surprisngly I agree with you on a lot of what you say, I just think you end up at a wrong conclusion.

    All the things you describe as “Jewish Psychology” – the lobbying, the oligarchy, the “nomad” mentallity – I would call “the Diaspora”. All these things that are not neccecerly bad, but the Nick Fuenteses, Adam Greens or Ryan Dawsons of the world THINK are bad, and are the thing that lead to all the animosity between Jews and other people, are the exact things that Zionism is supposed to combat against.

    I say “supposed” because as you point out yourself, Israel itself does engage in some of these “Diasporan” mentallity/actions/ whatever (I will argue that it does not do it in the quanitity that you claim it does, but that’s a different discussion). Or as a friend once told me, “Many countries don’t recognize Israel’s independence. Israel does not GRASP it’s independence.”
    And yes, I myself am sickened by how Jews have been living in Israel for all these years and have not let go the diasporan mindset – but I accept that this is a natural thing.

    Israel, in the end of the day, is still a work in progress. The USA is almost 300 years old and hasn’t got it’s sh*t together fully. If the situation remains the same when Israel is 300 years old, than we’ll have problem.

    But to me, the whole idea needs to be viewd throught the lances of early Zionism. Early Zionism should be the blueprint.
    The whole idea of עבודה עברית, that lead to Jews working in fields and trades that they have not practiced for 2,000 years due to both internal and external reasons.
    The IDF (and the different Shomer groups / Jewish undergrounds prior) is emensly important no just for physicially defending the Jews, but for giving a rebirth, for the first time since Bar Kochva, the very IDEA of a Jewish warrior.
    Zionism is about Jews building a society rather than attempt to be part of a society – an act that could be seen by those societies as leeching or being a parasite*.

    So as I see it, the day when Zionism is fully furfilled – which to me, means the day when ALL Jews have made Aliyah – is the day when all the bad things and negative aspects that are done by the “world Jewry” will sieze to exist, either because they just won’t have a reason to continue, or because they simpley won’t be able to continue – how can you have a Jewish lobby in the US, if there are no Jews in the US?

    If Zionism ever reaches it’s 100%, there won’t be a “World Jewry”. It doesn’t need to exist. The point of Zionism is to destroy The Nomad mentallity. At least, this is how I view it. Therefore, I get all the criticism of Israel, but I would argue that backing off Zionism because of this criticism is akin to being angry at a 8 year old kid because he cannot write a PhD properly.

    It will be a win-win situation to everyone. Well, accept for the Palestinians.

    * (a natural thing, which is not exclusive to the Jews. Read abou the “Middlemen Minority” theory, there are many groups who are viewd as “The Jews” of a particular area and are subject to a very simillar rhethoric.)

    ** as we are discuassing previous posts in light of your recent change of heart, how would you review THIS article? I have used it quite often, to be honest.


    • I don’t think we’re seeing the problem on quite the same terms. In my view the problem is not that Jews live in non-Jewish countries, it’s our overall mentality and how we operate as a community. Geography and the “ingathering” has nothing whatsoever to do with whether a man or a group of people concern themselves with what doesn’t concern them, i.e., (in this case) other people’s opinions. It has to be dealt with in the mind. It’s not just the meddling in other people’s opinions, either. It’s the weaselly symbiosis with larger powers that necessitates we concern ourselves with those opinions. You can posit all the hypotheticals you want, but we’ve had a Jewish state for 70 years and all these problems are worse than ever.

      If you want to be a warrior, be a warrior. Do it in the IDF if that’s your thing. But whether or not you’re a warrior has nothing to do with vindicating the Jews. It’s between you, as a man, and God/reality/the next ridge, the next pushup, the mile buoy, the menacing wildlife howling somewhere off the wadi where you’re camped out, etc. The aggregate decisions of fifteen million other human beings have nothing to do with it.

      Me personally, I’m half-Jewish on my father’s side, my wife is not Jewish, and I don’t see Judaism (or any one religion) as the be-all, end-all of spirituality and truth. I don’t want to live in Israel, I want to live in a green forest somewhere in Idaho or Chile. I dated Jewish women for years, and when I finally knocked up a non-Jewish one, Jewish continuity literally came into conflict with continuing my genes. Some personality types need one peculiar traditional system, and that’s their business. I only speak the truth as I see it.

      As far as the article you’re referring to, I don’t think I’ve contradicted myself. Just because U.S. aid to Israel is not charity does not mean that the relationship is not perverse. Israel is an arm of a world system, a corrupt world system (with HQs in NYC, DC, London, Brussels) and this presents disadvantages for Israelis. Jewish activity in the U.S. is in some sense a product of how much leverage the U.S. has over the rest of the world, including Israel. This goes against your view, by the way, that the ingathering will solve all our problems. If we were willing to scale back our quality of life and take the huge risk of operating as free agents, proletarians and farmers with no permanent foreign entanglements (as in the first couple decades of independence) the situation would be different. But again, the weight of historical and current evidence all goes against this possibility.

      Liked by 1 person

      • gk1901 says:

        I guess this only leaves me with one question: if you truly believe all you say, than what it is that makes you NOT go over the edge and turn into, well a Nick Fuentes? Because the general vibe I’m getting from what you write is “Jews are (mainly) at fault for their own problems, therfore all the persecution and hate they used to get is justified, and if only Jews changed themselves maybe things wouldn’t be so bad for them”.

        No, I am NOT saying that this is what you believe. I’m saying that you say all the stuff that people who DO believe in this always say. So with your change of mind, what is it that still keeps you seperate from what you yourself called “JQ Woke Spergs”?

        I hope this doesn’t come across as an accusation. I am genuenly curious.


      • All I’ve done is to point out that there are certain fucked up psychological features of Judaism. If it’s true then it’s worth recognizing, regardless of whatever people or ideologies you may associate with it. Freud, Jabotinsky, Arendt, all said similar things and it didn’t make them Nazis. Judaism prophecies doom: “in every generation they rise up to kill us,” Esav soné es Yaakov, etc. Anti-Semites fulfill this prophecy, affirming the Jews in their insularity and defensiveness, and the cycle goes round. Both mentalities are forms of fanaticism that view me as basically indistinguishable (in terms of my interests, affiliations, obligations) from e.g., Jared Kushner. I’m not in favor of either of them. I have no need to defend the one against the other until the time comes that innocent people are harmed—which I’ve done, in my other articles, and (ostensibly, half-assedly) in the IDF. But people have a right to dislike Jews, or anyone. That’s not persecution, yet Zionism and Judaism insist that it is.

        There is a large and obvious difference between what I’ve said here and what anti-semites say. Anti-semites hate strangers on account of their race. I don’t. I’m not blaming persecuted people for the decisions of other parties to persecute them, I’m saying that we have responsibility for how we choose to perceive and react to our reality. Zionism started out saying, “We can end this persecution.” Zionism now says, “It is inevitable that we will be hated, hunted, etc.” I reject this victimology. That is very different from approving of people who would execrate or persecute me strictly on account of my (father’s) ethnicity.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. gk1901 says:

    I still disagree with you on a lot but I can respect your view.

    You have turned into a more of a Jeremy Rothe-Kushel type instead of going full “Sunday Kike” (the reverse version of a Shabbos Goy) into a Hebrew Groyper. I can respect that as well.


    • IDK who that is but from what I can tell it’s an obscure YT page with a bunch of little truther clips of public figures being “confronted” and ignoring the guy behind the camera LOL


      • gk1901 says:

        He is a weirdo who once made a video about the “suspicous” fact thet Israel did a lot of R&D regarding counter-terrorism long before 9/11. Gee, I sure do wonder why Israel would invest in R&D regarding counter-terrorism before 9/11. It’s as if terror did not exist before it hit the Americans in 2001!


      • Just a thought experiment: what if everything in the Protocols is true? What if 50% of it is? What does that do to your Jewish identity? What if Israel did have a hand in 9/11? What does that do to your Zionism? Might complicate things, huh?


  6. Liquid Phosphex says:

    OT: There’s a video from a reactionary that tries to deconstruct Enlightenment concepts in order to dismantle them. His most recent one is this:

    The jist of this one is “liberty bad because trannies and fags, but freedom good because muh tribe and state jackboot good because fags bad”, but I think you should take a look at it and decide for yourself.


  7. gk1901 says:

    (New thread again, since I cannot reply to the specific comment, again:)

    “Just a thought experiment: what if everything in the Protocols is true? What if 50% of it is? What does that do to your Jewish identity? What if Israel did have a hand in 9/11? What does that do to your Zionism? Might complicate things, huh?”

    If the answe was not “yes”, I wouldn’t here…


  8. Halsey says:

    Did you get kicked off Twitter?


  9. Halsey says:

    Please send me an E-mail so we can finish our conversation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: