After the conclusion of the Derek Chauvin trial a few weeks ago, it became apparent that across the worlds of culturally left/liberal US corporations, non-profits, academia, professional sports, and electoral politics, certain slogans were mandatory to recite. The phrase “There Is Still Much Work To Be Done,” or some slight variation thereof, was
They proudly stand with Raytheon. They don't stand with Americans, Israelis or Palestinian citizens. Iran and china sell to one side, the US to the other. War is a business like slavery is a business.
What you've done is notice the things that the now vilified and totally erased-off-the-internet 'alt right' noticed during 2013-2017. When you criticize those who are never to be criticized, the entire syndicate comes after you, and they'll eventually stigmatize the movement until it's suffocated out of existence. "Alt right" was a term coined by sleepy libertarian Paul Gottfried many years ago - it was specifically directed at the inconsistencies of the Neocons and their fealty to Israel and the Big Gov't that mindlessly supports it. You can go even further back to the early 50's with John Beaty's "Iron Curtain Over America" for the genesis of this viewpoint.
The thing is you're not allowed to 'notice' any of this. The parroting you see, and the bipartisan bootlicking is manifest in all the Neoconservative and Neoliberal politicians. DJT had a unique angle in that he was a Boomer, and pro Israel, while savagely attacking their stranglehold on the Media and the Campus. That border wall he was pushing was a bridge too far. Border walls are only for certain countries, where they are not only necessary, but also inherently good. For evidence of this watch the human human ferret Ben Shapiro tag DJT supporters as 'racist' over and over for supporting a tight USA / Mexico border. (It's why they replaced Savage with Shapiro). It was all fascinating to watch. Now he's gone, from an election where 30 million more people voted than usual, including the historic 2008 election. So strange.
But these are all things you're not allowed to notice. That fact that you have, and have written about it; and even said truthful things about Buchanan and Ron Paul... that's bold. Fantastic work.
It isn't unreasonable to voice support for a strategic ally in the Middle East. But it is equally reasonable to question whether our unwavering support for Israel is at least one reason that our relationships with so many other nations in the area are strained.
That said, pulling our support for Israel would set off a firestorm of epic proportions. Israel seems to have a, "fuck around and find out" policy and frankly, I don't blame them. Iran seems to use Hamas to poke the bear on occasion to see what they will do.
If you are surrounded by enemies, you are going to be in a defensive posture all the time. That doesn't mean that indiscriminate violence against Gaza is justifiable. But you do need to consider that Palenstians are being used by other nation states to taunt their shared enemy.
When we talk about Israelis and Palestinians, the influence of other nations like Iran never seems to come up as active participants in unrest. Palenstians are being victimized by their own leadership and by other nation states that are all too happy to throw them into the meat grinder.
Western discourse on this issue seems to be one of hubris and ignorance. I don't have a comprehensive understanding of the history or the current issues at hand. It seems to be propaganda and bullshit on all sides. Peace would be a nice change of pace.
I don't know if it's as much of a contradiction as you're making it out to be. America First means that the U.S. government should put the interests of U.S. citizens above all else in its policies, both foreign and domestic, and that the governments of other countries should do the same for their citizens. It's certainly arguable, but it's not irrational to believe that: (1) Israel puts the interests of its citizens above all else when it responds disproportionately to Palestinian attacks; and (2) America puts the interests of its citizens above all else when it unconditionally supports its most reliable ally in the Middle East.
I just wish US politicians, especially democrats, showed as much interest in defending our borders as they have in defending Israel's borders. In terms of rhetorical logic, it makes little sense what our politicians do. In terms of DC politics, it makes perfect sense. There is no US version of AIPAC demanding we control our borders securely and also willing to dole out millions in bribes to US politicians to make it happen.
David French offers good insights and observations. Here are 2 excerpts and a link below:
"Moreover, under the laws of war, once Hamas initiated hostilities against Israel, then Israel possessed the legal right to not just defend itself against Hamas’s attacks or to retaliate against Hamas’s attacks, but to also destroy Hamas as a military force. It merely has to comply with the laws of war if it chooses to do so."
"Any discussion of the law of war often sounds cold and clinical, even though we’re discussing matters of life and death, including the inevitable and tragic deaths of civilians who always suffer when wars rage in city centers—especially when jihadists [Hamas] wear civilian clothes and embed themselves in civilian structures. When Hamas does so, it violates the law of war by inhibiting the distinction between civilian and military targets. The legal and moral responsibility for resulting civilian deaths rests with Hamas, not Israel."
Okay. Is that it? Is that their Big Crime to you? They voice their support (that they consistently show) for Israel when it's attacked?
Okily dokily. That's some crime there.
Umm, IF they said one thing then did another, you'd have something, Scooby Doo. But, this is nothing.
Now, let's talk about the empty platitudes on the Left. The "leaders" like Pelosi and Schumer like to play both sides, claiming to support Israel when there's a terrorist attack, but the other 364 days out of the year, they support Hamas. It is THEY who post their widdle hashtag hearts out on Twitter. #FreePalestine
100% agree with conservatives being WAY too uncritically pro-Israel. This leads them to overlook the areas where Israel is definitely in the wrong, like not making good on their promise to pull out of the other areas of the WB and tacitly (at the very least) allowing Israelis to continue to establish illegal settlements. They are also way too quick to violently engage, and this isn't always proportionate. When Israeli soldiers use disproportionate violence against a Palestinian citizen, it's a human rights abuse, plain and simple. Though this doesn't happen as much as BDS people like to pretend it does, it still happens far too often.
That being said, I do feel like there is a bit of a difference between blind support no matter what shady activities Israel is engaging in and acknowledging that Israel definitely has "the right to defend itself" in this specific situation. Yes, it's terrible that they blew up an apartment building. However, the Israeli military more often than not warns civilians via announcements or "knock on the roof" bombs so that they can evacuate. If they were indiscriminately lobbing bombs at civilians, the death toll would be much higher. Hamas doesn't perform such courtesies when THEY bomb civilian areas. Then there's the reality that they wouldn't target buildings like this at all if Hamas didn't use them as staging grounds for their own attacks. If Hamas cared about the death of civilians, they wouldn't hole up in residential buildings.
The Israelis ultimately have to make the tough decision to "discourage" the attacks by Hamas (which is really too soft of a word for it), thereby risking the lives of Palestinians, or to not respond and risk the lives of Israelis. Ultimately, governments have the responsibility to defend their own citizens. It's horrible, but a government's core function is protection and there would be no use having a state if it didn't do so. When peace is no longer possible, the best outcome in these types of situations is to do what Israel is doing now, which hopefully minimizes collateral. I hate referring to human beings like this, but that's how one has to look at it in these situations if the military is to fulfill its duty to its citizens.
"...their belief that the Rapture will soon commence and Jesus will return to that particular piece of land."
I don't think he would want us creating an apocalypse just to encourage his return - probably would see right through that. Seems more on the peace/love end of the spectrum and a bit of a socialist. Could have been a leftist/liberal icon but the liberal elites don't like populists so he was adopted by the right and had his image twisted by neocons into that of warmonger and capitalist mascot. The original Jesus would probably oppose war, the selling of weapons and would not stand with Raytheon (and its right to defend its stock price by any means necessary). We won't know until he tweets and banned by corporate media.
"President Joe Biden has a career-long record of defending Israel’s worst crimes. And as president, he is now facilitating this murderous crime against humanity being committed by his “great, great friend” Netanyahu. This is all rooted in Israel’s multidecade war of annihilation against the Palestinian people.
The Israeli and U.S. governments — indeed all Western governments — are promoting an insidious lie with a propaganda campaign to make Hamas the central issue of this bloodbath. The refrain, repeated over and over, that Israel has a right to self-defense, is intended to give Israel a shield of impunity and to justify its crimes against humanity. The U.S. position is that Israel has the right to self-defense, but the Palestinian people do not. Yet anyone who speaks of the horrors meted out against the overwhelmingly defenseless Palestinians is presented with a demand to denounce the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel. It is an effort to “both sides” what is an asymmetric campaign of terror waged by a nuclear power against a people who have no state, no army, no air force, no navy, and an almost nonexistent civilian infrastructure."
Not one of the people listed in this article are AF patriots.
Not close.
As soon as Trump hired Kirshner and listened to him over Stephen Miller, he stopped being AF in foreign policy.
They proudly stand with Raytheon. They don't stand with Americans, Israelis or Palestinian citizens. Iran and china sell to one side, the US to the other. War is a business like slavery is a business.
What you've done is notice the things that the now vilified and totally erased-off-the-internet 'alt right' noticed during 2013-2017. When you criticize those who are never to be criticized, the entire syndicate comes after you, and they'll eventually stigmatize the movement until it's suffocated out of existence. "Alt right" was a term coined by sleepy libertarian Paul Gottfried many years ago - it was specifically directed at the inconsistencies of the Neocons and their fealty to Israel and the Big Gov't that mindlessly supports it. You can go even further back to the early 50's with John Beaty's "Iron Curtain Over America" for the genesis of this viewpoint.
The thing is you're not allowed to 'notice' any of this. The parroting you see, and the bipartisan bootlicking is manifest in all the Neoconservative and Neoliberal politicians. DJT had a unique angle in that he was a Boomer, and pro Israel, while savagely attacking their stranglehold on the Media and the Campus. That border wall he was pushing was a bridge too far. Border walls are only for certain countries, where they are not only necessary, but also inherently good. For evidence of this watch the human human ferret Ben Shapiro tag DJT supporters as 'racist' over and over for supporting a tight USA / Mexico border. (It's why they replaced Savage with Shapiro). It was all fascinating to watch. Now he's gone, from an election where 30 million more people voted than usual, including the historic 2008 election. So strange.
But these are all things you're not allowed to notice. That fact that you have, and have written about it; and even said truthful things about Buchanan and Ron Paul... that's bold. Fantastic work.
It isn't unreasonable to voice support for a strategic ally in the Middle East. But it is equally reasonable to question whether our unwavering support for Israel is at least one reason that our relationships with so many other nations in the area are strained.
That said, pulling our support for Israel would set off a firestorm of epic proportions. Israel seems to have a, "fuck around and find out" policy and frankly, I don't blame them. Iran seems to use Hamas to poke the bear on occasion to see what they will do.
If you are surrounded by enemies, you are going to be in a defensive posture all the time. That doesn't mean that indiscriminate violence against Gaza is justifiable. But you do need to consider that Palenstians are being used by other nation states to taunt their shared enemy.
When we talk about Israelis and Palestinians, the influence of other nations like Iran never seems to come up as active participants in unrest. Palenstians are being victimized by their own leadership and by other nation states that are all too happy to throw them into the meat grinder.
Western discourse on this issue seems to be one of hubris and ignorance. I don't have a comprehensive understanding of the history or the current issues at hand. It seems to be propaganda and bullshit on all sides. Peace would be a nice change of pace.
Here we go, the comment section is about to be overrun with angry Israel-firsters.
I don't know if it's as much of a contradiction as you're making it out to be. America First means that the U.S. government should put the interests of U.S. citizens above all else in its policies, both foreign and domestic, and that the governments of other countries should do the same for their citizens. It's certainly arguable, but it's not irrational to believe that: (1) Israel puts the interests of its citizens above all else when it responds disproportionately to Palestinian attacks; and (2) America puts the interests of its citizens above all else when it unconditionally supports its most reliable ally in the Middle East.
I just wish US politicians, especially democrats, showed as much interest in defending our borders as they have in defending Israel's borders. In terms of rhetorical logic, it makes little sense what our politicians do. In terms of DC politics, it makes perfect sense. There is no US version of AIPAC demanding we control our borders securely and also willing to dole out millions in bribes to US politicians to make it happen.
David French offers good insights and observations. Here are 2 excerpts and a link below:
"Moreover, under the laws of war, once Hamas initiated hostilities against Israel, then Israel possessed the legal right to not just defend itself against Hamas’s attacks or to retaliate against Hamas’s attacks, but to also destroy Hamas as a military force. It merely has to comply with the laws of war if it chooses to do so."
"Any discussion of the law of war often sounds cold and clinical, even though we’re discussing matters of life and death, including the inevitable and tragic deaths of civilians who always suffer when wars rage in city centers—especially when jihadists [Hamas] wear civilian clothes and embed themselves in civilian structures. When Hamas does so, it violates the law of war by inhibiting the distinction between civilian and military targets. The legal and moral responsibility for resulting civilian deaths rests with Hamas, not Israel."
https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/the-two-wrongs-of-the-gaza-narrative?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo5MjE3NTgsInBvc3RfaWQiOjM2MzkzNDYxLCJfIjoielRiVmIiLCJpYXQiOjE2MjEwMjI3MDEsImV4cCI6MTYyMTAyNjMwMSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTIxNzY1Iiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.8Wm7ewDq5pyLsKqiEiUupkK431bwm47ykWScGtdTm3E
Okay. Is that it? Is that their Big Crime to you? They voice their support (that they consistently show) for Israel when it's attacked?
Okily dokily. That's some crime there.
Umm, IF they said one thing then did another, you'd have something, Scooby Doo. But, this is nothing.
Now, let's talk about the empty platitudes on the Left. The "leaders" like Pelosi and Schumer like to play both sides, claiming to support Israel when there's a terrorist attack, but the other 364 days out of the year, they support Hamas. It is THEY who post their widdle hashtag hearts out on Twitter. #FreePalestine
Boo hoo boo hoo.
100% agree with conservatives being WAY too uncritically pro-Israel. This leads them to overlook the areas where Israel is definitely in the wrong, like not making good on their promise to pull out of the other areas of the WB and tacitly (at the very least) allowing Israelis to continue to establish illegal settlements. They are also way too quick to violently engage, and this isn't always proportionate. When Israeli soldiers use disproportionate violence against a Palestinian citizen, it's a human rights abuse, plain and simple. Though this doesn't happen as much as BDS people like to pretend it does, it still happens far too often.
That being said, I do feel like there is a bit of a difference between blind support no matter what shady activities Israel is engaging in and acknowledging that Israel definitely has "the right to defend itself" in this specific situation. Yes, it's terrible that they blew up an apartment building. However, the Israeli military more often than not warns civilians via announcements or "knock on the roof" bombs so that they can evacuate. If they were indiscriminately lobbing bombs at civilians, the death toll would be much higher. Hamas doesn't perform such courtesies when THEY bomb civilian areas. Then there's the reality that they wouldn't target buildings like this at all if Hamas didn't use them as staging grounds for their own attacks. If Hamas cared about the death of civilians, they wouldn't hole up in residential buildings.
The Israelis ultimately have to make the tough decision to "discourage" the attacks by Hamas (which is really too soft of a word for it), thereby risking the lives of Palestinians, or to not respond and risk the lives of Israelis. Ultimately, governments have the responsibility to defend their own citizens. It's horrible, but a government's core function is protection and there would be no use having a state if it didn't do so. When peace is no longer possible, the best outcome in these types of situations is to do what Israel is doing now, which hopefully minimizes collateral. I hate referring to human beings like this, but that's how one has to look at it in these situations if the military is to fulfill its duty to its citizens.
I don't think one has to be a robot to say "I Stand With Israel." Last time I checked, I wasn't. Published today: would be interested to hear your thoughts. https://khmezek.substack.com/p/why-i-stand-with-israel
"...their belief that the Rapture will soon commence and Jesus will return to that particular piece of land."
I don't think he would want us creating an apocalypse just to encourage his return - probably would see right through that. Seems more on the peace/love end of the spectrum and a bit of a socialist. Could have been a leftist/liberal icon but the liberal elites don't like populists so he was adopted by the right and had his image twisted by neocons into that of warmonger and capitalist mascot. The original Jesus would probably oppose war, the selling of weapons and would not stand with Raytheon (and its right to defend its stock price by any means necessary). We won't know until he tweets and banned by corporate media.
I don't go to TI much anymore, but this is a pretty accurate telling of what's happening in Israel/Palestine right now: https://theintercept.com/2021/05/14/palestine-israel-hamas-netanyahu-biden/
"President Joe Biden has a career-long record of defending Israel’s worst crimes. And as president, he is now facilitating this murderous crime against humanity being committed by his “great, great friend” Netanyahu. This is all rooted in Israel’s multidecade war of annihilation against the Palestinian people.
The Israeli and U.S. governments — indeed all Western governments — are promoting an insidious lie with a propaganda campaign to make Hamas the central issue of this bloodbath. The refrain, repeated over and over, that Israel has a right to self-defense, is intended to give Israel a shield of impunity and to justify its crimes against humanity. The U.S. position is that Israel has the right to self-defense, but the Palestinian people do not. Yet anyone who speaks of the horrors meted out against the overwhelmingly defenseless Palestinians is presented with a demand to denounce the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel. It is an effort to “both sides” what is an asymmetric campaign of terror waged by a nuclear power against a people who have no state, no army, no air force, no navy, and an almost nonexistent civilian infrastructure."