With that off my chest, let me repeat what I find axiomatic about this issue:
1) There is no "independent Jewish state of Israel". "Israel" - as I will never tire of repeating - is an annex of the United States, pure and simple, nothing more. It doesn't matter any more that "Israel" had a quasi independent existence from 1957 to 1968-73, the period when it changed imperialist patrons. TODAY it is a complete creature of the USA, and can't last long without it.
More than the obvious military connection, it is in the area of politics and economics that the totally fused, annexed character of "the United States in the Middle East" stands out so clear. Only two other "independent states" have the sort of FTA that "Israel" has with the USA: Canada and Mexico. What a coincidence. An - if you caught my previous post (I do attempt subtlety, on occasion:-) - they're soon to be joined by a forth - Jordan! Now _that's really_ a coincidence!!
And on the political connection:
2) Zionism is an _ideology_ and a _political movement_, not an ethno-cultural attribute. As such, it is a specifically _American_ ideology and political movement. IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE that Zionism has its roots in 19th century European nationalism. Origins determine little in ideology and politics over the long run - look at Marxism. Ethno-national ideological origins are only an incidental initial condition of existence - however necessary a condition it may have been at the onset. Zionism has no more to do with "Jews" than Nazism had to do with "Germans" or emperor worship had to do with "Japanese". In fact, in the end, the representatives of the latter two ideologies pursued, as conscious policy, the deliberate destruction of "their own" peoples, failing only due to lack of power, in Hitler's case, or lack of ruling class support, in Hirohito's case. Zionism poses the same specific danger to the Jewish people -in the end, which will come.
3) What these ideologies and political movements have in common is not "nationalism" but capitalism and imperialism. In the case of Zionism, it is American capitalism and imperialism. In fact, the case could be made that Zionism is currently the ideal American Ideology. In fact, in the pantheon of American ideologies (and political movements), the vital connection of Zionism is not as the guarantor of "US support for Israel", but as one of the most open and vocal exponents of the most nakedly imperialist policies on the part of the US _worldwide_ - not just in the Middle East (which, though, is seen as the linchpin to the global hegemony). In this connection, what we see in "Israel" is simply American Empire writ small. This is significant in a country where the word "imperialism" does not openly appear in the mass political lexicon - in sharp contrast to the ostensive "models", Britain and Rome, as Lapham so presciently pointed out in a recent Harper's.
As a political movement or current, Zionism also plays a key - although hardly exclusive - role in internally binding together the "bipartisan" political regime. It's influence in both ruling class parties - as well as among American leftists - is testimony to its powerful role. This is less important than its role in Empire, it is the latter that makes it a key point of attack for progressive leftists.
Is it clear now? To respond to this with issues pertaining to nationalities is to engage the argument presented here in a non sequitur. Such responses can be safely ignored by us true "rootless cosmopolitans".
-Brad Mayer
At 02:20 PM 8/1/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 14:20:03 -0400
>From: "aaron hess" <aaronhess2 at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Anti-Zionism Is Racism
>
>In response to Michael Pugliese: