That argument makes no sense to me. First, I don't know what it means to
> talk about Israel's political culture as something apart from U.S. support.
> Without U.S. support that political culture would have to be very different.
> And what's superior about it? Proportional representation? These seem more
> like symbolic counters compared to the continuing and growing process of
> destruction of the Palestinians.
Maybe he meant that a third of the population of the territory it controls is denied the franchise or any political rights, and are confined to bantustans? Or that 25% of the two-thirds lucky enough to hold citizenship are denied the use of public lands (93% of the territory outside the bantustans!) because of their ethnicity? Or that its governing coalition includes charming fellows like Rabbi Ovadia Yosef ( http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=191782)? Or that it has two naturalization laws for different ethnicities, one of them requiring an oath of loyalty to the ethnicity of those covered by the other ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/11/israel-loyalty-oath-discriminatory)? All of that stuff sounds pretty sophisticated to me.
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."