by Lawrence Davidson
Last month Amira Hass, one of Israel’s best, bravest and most disliked journalists wrote a short piece in Haaretz entitled “
When ‘fascist’ is not a rude word,”
in which she tells us that “in fascist regimes the state is above all”
and notes that the sort of fascist-style bills pouring out of Israel’s
Knesset would “make Jean-Marie Le Pen and his daughter [the leaders of
the far-right party of France] look like amateurs.”
For instance, Hass cited a proposal from Danny Danon, a member of the
ruling Likud Party, mandating that “Every certificate issued by the
state will oblige [the recipient] to sign a document with a clause
declaring loyalty to the State of Israel,” or as one settlers’ Web site
explained: No declaration – then no driver’s license, no identity card,
no passport.
According to Hass’s article, Danon told Army Radio that his plan was
only part of “the total solution.” Danon proclaimed, “there are many
people who act against the State that protects them. Anyone who is not
faithful to the State should not be a citizen.”
Danon mainly has in mind the quarter of Israel’s population who are
not Jewish, but he would also throw into this category those Israeli
Jews audacious enough to stand up for political equality for all
citizens, such as those who object to the mistreatment of Arabs (or who
protest
the growing ultra-Orthodox demands for discrimination against women).
In other words, Danon’s aim is to manufacture “statelessness” for
those who object to signing loyalty oaths. (Statelessness is when people
are denied a connection with or protection from a state, often as a
result of discrimination or persecution.) As both 20
th
century European history and Israel’s 45 years in the Occupied
Territories attest, statelessness is a one-way road to physical and
cultural destruction.
But could this be so? Could it be that Israel, often hailed as the
“only democracy in the Middle East,” the U.S. friend and ally that
allegedly reflects American values is morphing into a fascist state? It
seems that, in Danon’s efforts to be “just like us,” this good-looking
and clean-shaven fellow is following in the footsteps of Senator Joseph
McCarthy.
Deeply indoctrinated Americans are going to need more than Amira
Hass’s word on this, however. They are going to need supporting
evidence. So after consulting with Danny Danon, they may want to move on
to
Benni Katzover.
Katzover is a major figure in the Israeli “settler movement” and a
supporter of the terrorist activities of the Zionist “price tag”
campaign, a bunch of “patriots” who attack Palestinians and Israeli
peace groups whenever the government frustrates the settlers’
helter-skelter expansionist activities on the West Bank.
Katzover may well have the same ends as Danon, but he is much more
out-front about them, declaring: “I would say that today, Israeli
democracy has one central mission, and that is to disappear. Israeli
democracy has finished its historical role, and it must be dismantled
and bow before Judaism.”
He said Israeli leftists who find this proposal frightening are just
“against anything that smells of holiness, and … act against the
foundations of Jewish faith.” One wonders what American Zionists who see
Islamic Sharia law undermining the foundations of democracy make of
Benni Katzover?
While estimates vary, it is not unreasonable to assume that Danny
Danon and Benni Katzover together command the support of at least 25
percent of the Israeli Jewish population. Otherwise the Israeli Knesset
would not look and act as it does and the settler movement would not be
so openly aggressive. And this category of Israelis is nothing if not
aggressive.
According to
a recent survey, the
Danon-Katzover types are mostly young and express their opinions in an
“open and unabashed” racist way. They express open hatred for Arabs and a
wish that those under Israeli control would die.
Jewish Humanitarians
Of course, there are other Israelis who represent the opposite point
of view. Thus, our figurative American supporters of Israel might also
want to interview some of them.
First they should look up
Uri Avnery,
a founding member of Gush Shalom, the Israeli Peace Bloc. Avnery has
solid Israeli credentials: he was a heroic fighter in the 1948 war, a
well-known journalist and was a distinguished past member of the
Knesset. However, he has also always asserted that Israel evolved along
the wrong path.
Avnery said it should not be a “nationalistic, theocratic ‘Jewish
State’” but rather a “modern, liberal state belonging to all its
citizens irrespective of national or religious roots.” This position
earned him a lot of enemies including Israel’s first Prime Minister
David Ben-Gurion and his successor, Golda Meir. Both considered Avnery a
“public enemy.”
Subsequently, there was an assassination attempt against him and the
office of his newspaper, Haolam Hazeh, was bombed. Avnery is a shining
light of humanism – and he is not the only one.
After talking to Avnery, our figurative inquirers should move on to
Rabbi Arek Ascherman,
the Director of Special Projects for Rabbis for Human Rights in Israel.
Ascherman’s position is that the only legitimate way you can have
Israel be a Jewish place is by having its institutions uphold Jewish
values.
For Ascherman that means getting in the way, as best one can, of the
“ugly side” of Israeli behavior and policies such as standing against
the house demolitions, land confiscations, settler encroachments,
arbitrary arrests, beatings and killings of Palestinians, etc. For his
efforts Ascherman and his organization have suffered the same sort of
attacks as has Avnery.
Asherman’s car has been stoned (by Israelis), and he has been
arrested and beaten up. His fate reminds one of the treatment received
by civil rights workers in the 1960s in the U.S. South. This seems to be
another way that Israel is “just like us.”
Avnery, Ascherman and other Israeli Jewish men and women who fight
for human decency probably command the support of, at most, 15 percent
of the Israeli Jewish population.
The Indifferent
And what of the rest of Israel’s Jews? Well, the
survey mentioned above
found that the other 60 percent are indifferent to the Palestinians,
but in a generally negative way. For instance, many in this category (up
to 46 percent) “would not be willing to live next door to them.”
It is actually the negatively tinged indifference of this majority of
Israeli Jews that allows the more assertive and aggressive 25 percent
to gain power and assure the country’s status as a truly apartheid
state. The 15 percent who may support Avnery and Ascherman essentially
become social misfits within the Israeli milieu.
They have somehow escaped the full impact of Zionist education and
ideology. They have broken free of the conformist pressures of family,
community, army and media propaganda. And, having freed themselves from
what Gabriel Kolko calls “enforced consensus,” they collectively become a
fringe element.
It is strange that all countries seem to have such self-aware and
active humanitarians in roughly the same relative proportion – about 15
percent. This is just large enough to remind us of what good humanity is
capable of, but just too small to help us realize that good.
