Sunday, September 21, 2014

What has Israel got that Norway does not?

What is this thing they call special relationship between America and Israel? Is it for real or is it a charade everyone pretends to play because no one knows how to get out of it? Well, this is a tough nut to crack, my friend, so sit back and enjoy the ride while trying to figure a way to crack this nut.

There was a time in America when “liberal” Jewish thinking was thought to be superior thinking because it was seen to behave like the giant who could lap the intellectual Lilliputians of America for breakfast but refrained from doing so because of the goodness of his heart. A famous example of that was Alan Dershowitz who said something to the effect that you cannot blame Israel for doing the things that everyone else did at one time or another – and Dershowitz was deified for his supreme eloquence and infinite wisdom.

What he said and the way he said it was so succinct, so fresh and so powerful, the “conservative” Anglo thinkers who used to dominate the intellectual landscape of America at the time were made to look like bugs blinded by so much liberal light, they could not find a shaded spot where to hide and catch their breath. But they did hide in a few places, and they stayed there till they almost became extinct. There was one exception, however, a place that was not too shaded, and where the Anglo thinkers could stay almost unmolested. That was academia.

It was there in Academia that the liberal Jewish thinking was parsed and shown to be nothing better than intellectual masturbation. The Dershowitz saying, for example, was interpreted to mean that Israel had the right to inflict on the Palestinian people every horrible act that anyone in history had ever inflicted on someone. This was no longer viewed as reflecting the intellectual prowess of a giant; it was viewed as reflecting the expressed desires of a Jewish bunch of terrorists.

Still, seeing themselves losing their mettle and developing a kind of mental sclerosis around many issues of the day, the conservative Anglos of academia took advantage of the fact that their world was being filled with worldly academics that had come from Europe, Asia and just about everywhere else in the world. They began to absorb what the newcomers had brought with them and before long, became the new liberals of America, harboring a view of the world that was more akin to that of the United Nations than that of the American isolationists of yesteryear.

Meanwhile, the Jewish liberals who were outside academia and were seeing their intellectual prowess (once considered supreme) being shattered like glass under the steamroller that was “Christian” thinking – decided to jump onto the steamroller and occupy the driver's seat. They did not quite make it to that seat, but were given a place of honor in the passenger's seat. They became the new conservatives or the neocons.

So now, the battle is raging between the non-academic conservatives of which a withering Jewish group continues to fight for control of the whole religious enchilada – and between the academic liberals of which a withering Jewish group continues to fight for control of the whole worldly enchilada. And this is where what used to be a tough nut to crack is finally beginning to show signs of cracking.

With this background under the belt, we now tackle the article that was written by Matthew Continetti under the title: “The Influence Loophole” and the subtitle: “If lobbyists are obligated to disclose foreign contributions, why not think tanks?” It was published on September 20, 2014 in National Review Online. This debate has been ongoing for a while now, and Continetti makes several references to that effect.

What can help us crack the nut, as tough as it is, would be a convincing answer to the question: What has Israel got that Norway does not? Even if we disregard all of Israel's shortcomings, and take it at its word that it is a genuine liberal democracy in the “Western” style, Israel cannot be more so than Norway. And yet, look what Continetti says about these two entities.

He says the following about Norway. “Take Norway, which has given millions to think tanks. Among Norway's goals: Push the U.S. government to fight deforestation. Why? Not out of environmental concern. Slowing deforestation could buy more time for Norway's oil companies to sell fossil fuels even as Norway push for new carbon reduction policies … It is one thing if Tom Steyer gives money to harm his opponents and benefit his allies. Steyer is an American. But it is another thing when a foreign government enters policy debates – and does so in secret … Many of the countries giving to think tanks are American allies like Norway.”

And he says the following about Israel. “The director of Brookings's foreign-policy program was overheard bashing the Jewish State and its government over drinks at a hotel bar … During the war between Israel and Hamas, John Kerry attempted to broker a ceasefire. He did not spend too long in Egypt, whose government had been leading the negotiations in cooperation with the Israelis. Instead, Kerry set off to Paris … But allies have nothing to fear from transparency. And Israel has a broad, deep, and thriving community of supporters both Jewish and Christian. There will always be an Israel “lobby” because of the ethnic and religious and ideological connections between our two countries.”

As can be seen from the last passage, it would have been difficult to crack the nut. In fact, it was because the argument favoring Israel was reduced to a one-liner. It was said that Israel was good because it was a democracy. From this wellspring – however false it was -- came out all the praises about Israel, as well as the rejections of all the things that did not consider Israel supreme in every way you can imagine.

But now that we are in a position to ask the question: What has Israel got that Norway does not? And now that no convincing response can be given as to the specialness of Israel, the nut is cracked, and out of it comes the sordid history of the Jews in America.

It is a history of Jews pretending to be the best because they are superior liberals and not inferior conservatives; and pretending at the same time to be the best because they are superior conservatives and not inferior liberals. It is a sick joke that is making no one laugh anymore.

And the rest of the world looks at the American Jews, and considers them to live by an inferior ideology.