Israel & The Iron Wall

Netanyahu Emerges Weakened,
But Most under Israeli Apartheid were Disenfranchised
Juan Cole, 23-1-2013


netanyahuThe combined Likud coalition with Yisrael Beitenu only got about 31 seats (the Israeli parliament has 120).
Likud is a far rightwing party based on the Fascist political philosophy of Vladimir Jabotinsky in the 1930s, while Yisrael Beitenu (Israel Our Home) is a far right nationalist party based on Russian, Ukrainian and other former Soviet Bloc populations, many of them only nominally Jewish or not actually Jewish at all…
Netanyahu is convinced that he will still be able to cobble together the 61 seats needed, at a bare minimum, for a majority in the Knesset. This outcome, however, is by no means a sure thing. Even if he can win a third term, his government will be fragile and deeply divided.
The 20% of Israelis of Palestinian heritage do not usually vote in larger numbers. They face so much discrimination that it is hard to convince them that anything good can come from an Israeli election.


4 million Palestinians living under Israeli control could not vote in these elections.Israel has annexed the Palestinians but is keeping them stateless. There is no other country in the world engaged in so cruel an enterprise.


Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky



Jabotinsky was an anti-authoritarian individualist as well as a defender of an authoritarian Zionist (tribalist) state. You could call him an ANARCHO-FASCIST.

Anarcho-Fascism: A political philosophy which believes that an Anarchic society, in the absence of publically recognized government or enforced political authority, can and should be brought about through a harsh authoritarian state. It is believed that since the people cannot be trusted to come to this freedom on their own, it must be imposed on them by the state.

Jabotinsky, the ANARCHIST
(liberal defender of individualism)

Jabotinsky1In the beginning, God created the individual. Every individual is a king equal to his fellow. It is preferable that the individual sin against the society than the society sin against the individual.
Society was created for the good for individuals, not the opposite. The messianic vision is one of a paradise for the individual, a glorious anarchic kingdom, a contest between personal abilities ‘society’ has no rule but to help those who have fallen… [Jabotinsky, V. in “My Story,” 1936 in Autobiography (Hebrew), p. 38]

A revolution is what I call a liberating uprising but there is no liberation except in freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. There is no liberation without the right of every citizen to influence, to change the regime; no liberation without equality of rights for every citizen regardless of race, religion and class. My outlook is in essence the negation of the totalistic state. The state system that is the most normal and healthy as well as the most pleasant is the “minimal state.”
The instinctive ideal of man is a serene anarchy. As long as this ideal cannot be realized, democracy must be recognized as the form closes to the ideal.
An individual – this is the supreme concept, the highest value, that which was created “in the image of God”.
The doctrine of communo-fascism states that man is part of state societal mechanism. Our tradition has it that in the beginning, God created the individual. Man is intended to be free. [Jabotinsky, V., Introduction to the Theory of Economy – Part Two, 1934, in Nation and Society (Hebrew), p. 218-219]

(Source)

Jaobtinsky, the ZIONIST
(militant defender of a tribalist, ‘jewish’, state)

Jaobitinsky-1926Picture source

Jabotinsky thought that Jewish justice overrides Palestinian rights, and he was the first to warn the Zionist Movement that the clash between Jewish and Palestinian nationalisms is inevitable, and it should not be ignored.
He advocated the use of force to curb the inevitable clash and to keep it at bay, instead of negotiating with the Palestinian people to resolve this issue.

The road map for the Israeli leaders policies towards the Palestinian people was clearly stated by Ze’ev Jabotinsky in an article published in Ha’aretz newspaper in 1923:
“…. Settlement can thus develop under the protection of a force that is not dependent on the local population, behind an IRON WALL which they will be powerless to break down. …. a voluntary agreement is just not possible. As long as the Arabs preserve a gleam of hope that they will succeed in getting rid of us, nothing in the world can cause them to relinquish this hope….” (Iron Wall, p. 14)

Ze’ev Jabotinsky advocated the colonization of Palestine under the protection of arms regardless of the Palestinian people’s objections. He stated in 1925:
“Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native [Palestinian] population. This colonization can, therefore, continue and develop under the protection of a force independent of the local population… To formulate it any other way would be hypocrisy.” (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 28)

And he also stated that Zionists believed in an “Iron Wall” as follows: “In this sense, there is no  meaningful difference between our militarists and our vegetarians. .. We all applaud, day and night, the Iron Wall.” (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 28)


Jabotinsky’s IRON WALL doctrine caused many Zionists to brand him as a fascist in the 1920s. However, as the Nazis rose to power in Germany, Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders recognized the “importance” of Jabotinsky’s doctrine.
Ironically, the Israeli Political Right’s arguments dictated Israel’s policies toward the Palestinian people from the 1930s to the present day.
This doctrine has dictated a continuous state of war between the Jewish state and its Arab neighbors.

(Source: PalestineRemembered)

Advertisements