The So-Called State of Israel
Fools aside, everyone knows that Israel is at war with Arafat’s army of Arab
Palestinian terrorists. Almost every day Jews are killed or wounded by Arab
gunfire. Arabs traverse the roads shooting at, or mowing down, Jews.
Mothers send their children to school fearful the kids may not arrive or
return safe and sound. To this add the fear that Israel may again become
the target of Iraqi missiles.
Nevertheless, Israel’s political elites jockey for place, perks, and power.
Especially irresponsible and shameless are the left-wing parties, Labor and
Meretz, but paltriness also permeates other parties lusting for the control
of various ministries, the instruments by which these parties divide the
public treasury.
Such is the odor of politics in Israel that one begins to wonder whether
Jews deserve a state of their own. But perhaps we all live in an illusion.
Perhaps Israel is not a “state”? Perhaps the Proclamation of the State of
Israel of 1948 - now called, in imitation of America, the “Declaration of
Independence” - was and remains a falsification of reality?
What, indeed, is a “state,” and does Israel fit the definition? My
dictionary indicates that a state is “a politically independent entity
representing a people and occupying a definite territory.” This definition
of a state contains three elements. (1) A state must be a politically
independent entity. (2) This entity must represent a people. And (3) this
people must occupy a definite territory. Let’s apply this definition to
Israel.
(1) First of all, the so-called State of Israel has never been truly
independent. From its inception in 1948 it has been tied by an umbilical
cord to the United States. Moreover, Israeli prime ministers slavishly
imitate the lifestyle and diplomacy of foreign powers. In fact, these prime
ministers even lick the boots of Yasser Arafat, merely the leader of a gang
of terrorists! By no stretch of the imagination can the so-called State of
Israel be considered a “politically independent entity.”
(2) Nor does this reputed “state” represent a people. What, indeed, is a
“people”? Referring to Israel, the Torah (Numbers 23:9) declares : “Behold
a people (an Am) that dwells alone and shall not consider itself [as merely
one] among the nations (Goyim).” Whereas an Am signifies a collectivity
united by a religious heritage, Goy signifies a collectivity united only on
the basis of a common territory or homeland. Let us therefore define a
people as monocultural entity united not only by language, but by shared
beliefs and values rooted in a common and immemorial past. Inasmuch as the
Jews and Arabs inhabiting the so-called State of Israel have antagonistic
beliefs and values, it cannot be said that this state represents a “people.”
Besides, those who control the political and judicial institutions of this
seeming and seamy state represent only themselves or their party factions.
Look at the Knesset: Many of its members hop from one party to another and
thereby betray those who originally voted for them. And thanks to fixed
party lists, which compete in a single country-wide electoral district,
Knesset Members (MKs) are not individually accountable to the voters in
regional elections. The truth is that these MKs - but therefore and
especially cabinet ministers - can ignore the voters with impunity. (That’s
why Yossi Beilin could scornfully say at a meeting of the Labor Party’s
central committee: “When have we ever listened to the people?”)
Meanwhile, the judges of Israel’s Supreme Court represent only themselves or
a narrow clique of ultra-secularists. They manifest their contempt for the
legal and ethical heritage of the Jewish people by employing American,
English, and Continental systems of jurisprudence. So far as these judges
are concerned, Israel has no distinctive character; it’s merely a
collection of individuals. It’s not an Am but a Goy!
(3) Finally, contrary to the above definition of a state, which requires
that the people occupy “a definite territory,” Israel’s borders are not at
all definite. Some 200,000 Israelis reside in the “territories” (say Judea
and Samaria), which may soon be under the control of Arafat and his
Palestinian Authority. And if this were not enough to make nonsense of the
State of Israel, almost all of Israel’s political parties support the
protean policy of “territory for peace.” Which means they value “peace”
more than “territory.” From this it logically follows that these parties
will surrender territory whenever Arabs threaten war! Hardly the attitude
of any genuine state.
The conclusion is inescapable: What is called the “State of Israel” does
not contain any element of a state as defined above. The State of Israel
simply does not exist!
