Israeli politics general thread: 2019 and beyond - the dawn of the monarchy

[Velasco]

Netanyahu (or at least, all Netanyahu's defense policies that the left doesn't like) are already synonymous with Israel. If Gantz was Priem Minister, he would be doing mostly the same stuff and the non-Jewish left would loathe him as much as they loathe Bibi. They don't hate Bibi because he's a conservative, they hate him because he's a nationalist and every Israeli PM is going to be a nationalist.

There's no reconciling leftist internationalism with Zionism. Jews who are advocate leftist internationalism are not allies of the Israeli state and there's no reason for the Jewish state to care what they think.

It's not only the defense policy: it's the apartheid. I concur that both Ganz and Netanyahu are nationalists, but possibly they are nationalists of a different kind. Netanyahu is an unashamed ethno-nationalist who despises the concept of "peace" and seeks -step by step- a reactionary agenda. I think it's clear the State of Israel is following a path that it's increasingly authoritarian. Gantz is a military man and obviously a nationalist ("Blue and White"). However Gantz was still talking about "peace", albeit in very vague terms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall Gantz stated something like: "Jews and Palestinians are here to stay, so we need an 'arrangement'". Netanyahu, on the other hand, is crystal clear: he doesn't want peace or "arrangements", only the permanence of status quo (occupation, apartheid) and the progressive annexation of the West Bank. Gantz is far from being an ideal counterpart, but I think it would have been better as PM (for Israelis and Palestinians, not only for the leftist gentiles). But maybe not much better; admittedly I was rather skeptic about him and his chances of beating Bibi at elections. Gantz is an exponent of the militarization of the Israeli politics. Netanyahu represents a step further (way ahead of revisionist Zionism, extreme degradation) in that process of militarization, as he is the exponent of more authoritarian and ethnic form of nationalism. It's not a coincidence that the best friends of Bibi are Trump, Putin and Bolsonaro. As you say in the last paragraph, the reactionary ultranationalists that govern the State of Israel don't need and don't care about the Jewish leftists and liberals. They have a different vision and worldview, clearly illiberal and regressive.

[Velasco]

Etho-nationalism better describes the Israeli left who favor a 2 state solution with an Israeli state where the population is curated by the government to maintain an ethnic Jewish majority.

The Israeli right are racial imperialists who want to rule over and deny rights to non-Jews in their territory.

Neither policy is compatible with Western progressivism.

What you call "racial imperialism" is just a more aggressive version of ethno-nationalism. Personally I think the trwo state solution is unworkable for a number of reasons. Additionally such arrangement is going to be always unfair with the Palestinians, because most pf their ancestral land would be on the Israeli side. Also, I get the impression that some proponents of the two state solution think that they could turn their backs on the Palestinians and live separately. I think it's physically and geographically impossible. Still, it'd be better to try that solution than the nothing, but there's no way that is going to happen. Ariel Sharon stated some years ago that Palestinians would rather have their state in Finland. Crystal  clear.

This is true. But many Israelis don't see Western progressivism as compatible with the survival of the Jewish people.

I think the Jewish people will survive anyway. However the survival of the State of Israel in the long term might not be compatible with the current state of affairs. Israel is a strange body in the Middle East that eventually could be ejected, given the little efforts of its rulers to make peace and cultivate friedship with neighbours. The increasing segregationism and authoritarianism, natural consequences the regime of occupation militarization of the State, are not compatible with western democracy. I'd say Israel is still a democracy within 1967 borders, although it's not a full functioning democracy and the trend points to less freedom in the future. Many Israelis are willing to exchange freedom for security besides supporting ignominy, but they are destroying the future in the process.

[Velasco]

See, David, I have read sonething about the history of the Jewish people. Particularly about the recent history of the Jews in Europe. Possibly I pay more respect for that people than some of our posters for the Palestinians. It's a disgrace the lack of empathy. I took the expression "strange body" from an Israeli historian, although I'm afraid that many of you would consider people saying such things "traitors". The modern state of Israel is the product of a recent wave of colonization, regardless the Jews inhabited these lands by the time of the Old Testament. So yes, Israel is a "strange body" in the present geopolitical context of the Middle East. This is neither derogatory nor a call for expulsion: it's a fact. Also, I despise Bibi and regard him a corrupt criminal. Crystal clear.