Today we have another great guest post from our good friend Dawn Pine, aka The Male Brain, over in Israel. This specific post is actually a translation of a post originally written in Hebrew by one Yuval Bloomberg, The original article was quite long, and TMB saw fit to split it into two parts. The second part will follow over the coming days. This first part takes a look at the global conflicts currently brewing, the nature of the clashes of these civilisations, the role of a clearly waning and ailing American superpower, and the implications for and likely future of Israel. It is a complex, informative, and quite interesting article. Many thanks as always to our good friend for the time and effort that he put into translating all of this – it’s a fascinating insight into geopolitics.
Conservatives and progressives clash
In 1996 Samuel Huntington published his book, The Clash of Civilisations. The book described the post-Cold War world and drew the new borders of culture and military conflicts between civilisations. Huntington divided the globe to 8 major civilisations and accurately predicted the clash between western and Islamic civilisations.
Looking back, it seems clear that he failed to predict a major intra-civilisation conflict, more significant than the Western (and other) civilisation and the Islamic one. It is the internal conflict inside the Western civilisation.
We are talking about the most significant fracture line, dividing the Western culture in two sub-civilisations – conservative and progressive. It is a fight which originated at the end of the 18th Century, during the French revolution, continuing through the 19th Century, losing ground to the major national conflicts of the 20th Century and finally, after the Soviet collapse and the reduction of global tension once the Cold War was over, resumed its place.
The major forces of the west stood one against the other. On the one side conservativism – representing the national-liberal democracy of free economy. On the other side progressivism – representing the utopian outlook, anti-national, socialistic economy and a limited concept of democracy.
It took a few years for the fight to be noticeable, as it was only in some of the Western nations, especially in the political fringe. The lack of major global wars allowed the conflict to expand and move to the political mainstream, sweeping the democratic nations into a global confrontation. It is a conflict for the destiny of the future of the free world, more than any other civilisation conflict, because it dictates the attitude to all the forming issues of nations – decades and maybe centuries ahead. Those include also issues threatening the very existence of the democratic nations.
Even though the violence raised its ugly head mainly in the US, by the radical left, currently the conflict is mostly for the civilians’ minds, via creating narrative to determine the reality best serving the political ideology.
We may assume that the clash of the sub-civilizations will not be determined by 1917 Bolshevik-style violence, the Chinese civil war that created Mao, or the violent uprising in Cambodia. There are way more elegant and effective ways to control, without bloodshed, the main authorities: The media, including all social network (public opinion), legislative branch, courts and law enforcement.
Violent outbreaks as seen in the US may occur from time to time and have a strong deterrent effect on the public, but they are only a piece of the puzzle. The war on the minds is the central arena and there resides the key for victory.
Progressive win will establish a “silent dictatorship”. It is a frame of empty democratic procedures, which actually dismantles the national structure by encouraging massive immigration, limiting freedom of speech to specific small boundaries, assigning jurisdiction to an un-elected rank of officials, delegating political power to the Judiciary while diluting the executive branches authorities, taking power from the legislative branch and moving it to the executive branch to reduce its freedom of action.
Conservative win will lead to marinating the political system that was present until the 1990, having 2 central blocs of Left and Right as well as clear separation of powers. Well, conserving what is now no more.
(TMB comment – we actually saw what happened during the 2000-2008 phase in the US. “Conservative” rule will probably mean semi-authoritarian reign. It is far better than the progressive one, but we are still on course to dictatorship)
The line between conservatives and progressives (in Israel it is just Left and Right) crosses all democratic nations, but there are several tangents, which are the main clashes. That conflict will influence other nations as well – such as India, Eastern Europe and more.
Israel’s part of the global conflict
Israel is one of the main outposts in the Left-Right global clash for a number of reasons:
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Unlike other conflict around the world, this one is between two groups residing in different ranks of the progressive identity politics.
The Palestinians are a protected wild life enjoying the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. It is a free pass to do whatever and not be accountable. They may lie and receive immunity since the post-modernist concept allows every narrative to become “truth”.
On the other hand, the state of Israel is fair game, the more the merrier. Israeli Jews are old world colonialists, so they are at the bottom of the identity rank.
By the progressive principle, in every conflict of political-national type, the group who ranks higher on the intersectional identity scale wins. That group has suffered “Western imperialism crimes” so it has the legitimacy until the end of time to do as they please, while their crimes are bleached clean – past, present and future. The Israeli and Arab Palestinians are right on the line between the two ideologies.
(TMB comment – The bar is usually raised high for Israel and low for Arabs or Palestinians.)
Benjamin Netanyahu
The hidden and open conflicts between Netanyahu and Obama, especially the historic speech in Congress against the Iran nuclear agreement, put Netanyahu head-to-head with the progressive messiah. Netanyahu represented the cautious, conservative real politic approach that takes reality seriously. On the other side stood the modern flower child trying to push his leftist fantasies on the Middle Eastern jungle. Even without that speech, Netanyahu was already a global brand, but it positioned him as one of the main conservative leaders.
Antisemitism
The Antisemitism hiding behind the “Anti-Israeli” and “legitimate criticism” against the “occupation” draws a lot of attention to Israel due to the desire to hurt the Jewish state. The UN Human Rights Council is one of the more grotesque examples of this phenomenon. This sector harbours a long lasting collaboration between Islamic groups and leftist movements. Both sides share the interest of hurting Israel.
An additional side showing significant Anti-Semitic and Anti-Israeli characteristics is the massive operation of foreign NGOs stirring the political landscape. Their goal is to delete or erase the Jewish identity of the state of Israel and replacing it with “non-civic nationality”. Such a state will provide an advantage to the Palestinians who are entitled to it based on the identity politics.
(TMB comment – the main problem is that this flute was played excessively often. The current generation just developed “immunity” to being called an anti-Semitist. Being accused of it now generates no echo, unlike being called “RACIST”)
The US Connection
The long-lasting relationship between Israel and the US makes Israel a strategic target. The sin of the progressive sub-civilisation in Israel will resonate in the US and across the democratic sphere and create a strong momentum for the left. Israel, in this context, is a front outpost whose fall is almost essential to wing the global conflict.
The Struggle for the Israeli mind
Israels’ centricity in the international arena, as stated above makes it one of the main battlefields of the sub-civilisational clash.
Many entities stir the Israeli society with a clear aim of influencing the mind, channelling toward the anti-Jewish-national heading while at the same time towards a pro-national Arab-Palestinian heading. The overall goal is the “non-civic nation”. A nation in which the Jewish component loses its precedence and has no national preference. In such an environment, there is no raison d’etre for the Law of Return, encouraging Aliyah (Jewish immigration, Jewish hymns, and other Jewish public marks).
(TMB comment – The Law of Return is a law that provides automatic citizenship for immigrant Jews coming to Israel. No other person can become a citizen this fast).
At the same time, the religious Arab-Muslim population, who want to conquer what they consider an Islamic territory, can act due to its sanctity in the leftist identity politics. The 2021 riots gave us a taste of the Arab public ambitions in Israel, and at the same time highlighted the inability and lack of will for the judicious and enforcement branches to acknowledge and deal with it.
(TMB comment – This is generalisation. It was a minority, but a big one)
When the Jewish nationality stops being part of the Israeli identity, the process will intensify. Within a short time after the Jewish people will be subdued, Israel will move to a middle phase of non-civic nation and after a generation or two reach the final stage of Islamic state.
The Left would not like to live in such a state, but its perception of history does not allow their leader to predict an event that does not follow “the deterministic flow” of history.
Numerous actors are working to divert the public opinion in that direction. There are two main types: External and internal.
External actors are mostly foreign NGOs, which rely heavily on private funding. That funding comes from leftist organizations and European governments.
Internal actors are political parties, media, foreign funded NGOs, the courts with the Supreme Court leading, the attorney’s office and ex-MOD people.
The campaign on public opinion occurs on multiple levels in order to undermine the ideological basis on which the national right wing sits. That undermining targets the demographic advantage of the right. Passing that gives access to power and thus promoting the disassembly of the Jewish part of Israel. The basis of the campaign is a continuous brainwash to delegitimise and/or ridicule the subject of attack until weakening it or annihilating it.
The campaign can be divided to three main categories:
Political Leaders
The goal is to delegitimise leaders, especially those who seem focus on advancing the conservative ideology. Once marked, all the Leftist media channels start to blast on all shows, channels, publications and investigations. Most of the time it is engineered information for one purpose: political assassination. It can go on for years, spanning thousands of publications that inevitably will erode the image of the target for the public who consumes that information.
The consciousness campaign will not only focus on the men himself, but on everyone around him. It will try to make them miserable until they leave politics or “straighten out”.
The ultimate example is Netanyahu. He and his family have been at the other end of such campaign for decades now. Everyone around him is “fair game”. If one crashes under the pressure, the burden is relieved and now its “patting time” to rebuild the image. Right after Ariel Sharon announced that he would destroy Gush Katif and retreat from Gaza while transferring tens of thousands of Jews against their wish, his public image was immediately transformed. From the “Sabra and Shatila mass murderer” with multiple criminal suspicions, he became “statesman”, “leader”, “a man of peace” while simultaneously erasing any reference to criminal acts.
(TMB comment – There are also good US-based examples. Trump became Hitler, while John McCain was praised when he died.)
Right wing publics
We can simplistically divide the Israeli Right wing into 5 major groups:
- Religious traditional (most of them) Sephardic;
- Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox;
- Supporters of SHAS party – Sephardic ultra-orthodox and traditional religious;
- Settlers of Judea and Samaria;
- Urban secular right wingers (both Ashkenazi and Sephardic);
Most of the demographic is what Dr. Gadi Taub called “Stationary”. The consciousness campaign deals with each group separately in order to create loathing and delegitimizing toward them. That prevents them from achieving public support or at least reducing it. On the other hand, the groups will be weakened by creating feelings of inferiority and an apologetic state of mind – constant negative emotional overload that makes the target susceptible to brainwash.
Each group is negatively branded with recurring messages in countless shapes and forms. The negative branding is enhanced via the media, entertainment, movies and art as well as literature. One cannot escape such an attack unless you stop consuming Israeli content or moving from Israel.
The strength of the campaign is correlated to the level of political threat the group poses. The more dangerous the ideology to the leftist vision – the harder the campaign. For decades the settlers were the most significant threat for number of reasons. The first reason was because, unlike the ultra-orthodox they actually wanted to influence the state. Second, they were actively “conquering” Judea and Samaria thus stopping the erection of the Arab-Islamic state there. Third, their determination to assimilate the media and the defence establishment and influence from there increased their political threat to the Left.
The Sephardic are labeled inferior people, grave prostrating, kissing doorposts (Mezuzah), riffraff, uneducated, culturally backwards, and unenlightened. The construct was that Sephardic religious traditionalist is necessarily a primitive person and the only way to escape the brands is – to convert his political religion. In a heartbeat, you move from primitive to modern, from dark to light and without even reading a single book.
Moreover, one can become more blunt, violent and darker. However, after the conversion, the branding repaints the whole picture in “woke” colors. It is hard to overestimate the effect of negative and positive branding on people’s opinions.
The ultra-Orthodox are always branded as parasites, evaders, a non-human black bulb, dangers to public health, extortionists and an incubator of sexual malice in the family. Occasionally the attention is directed to the Rabbis in order to ridicule and laugh at them. The campaign isn’t necessarily aggressive, in most cases it aims at the defenceless subconscious.
One of the best examples is marking in a negative news report the ultra-orthodox. If it is some other group, it will not be “secular”, “Arab” or “Orthodox Christian”. If it is an ultra-Orthodox person – it will be mentioned. This creates the construct of ultra-Orthodox as a massive black bloc threatening to outnumber the enlightened Israeli public by the force of demography and the ability to extort.
Shas Party supporters “enjoy” a double brand, both ultra-Orthodox and also traditionally religious. They are mainly a brand is of Sephardic living and less part of the “big black bloc” and more of the “doorpost kissers”.
The settlers get the worst negative stereotypical branding for decades from the above-mentioned reasons. The consciousness campaign against them had motives aimed to crush them and their public image with no way to recover.
Some of the most awful texts ever stated against a political group came from all the left power centers. In an article written by Amos Oz in 1989 he wrote of them:
A messianic cult, brutal and heartless, armed gangsters, performing crimes against humanity, sadists, murderers who appeared… from a dark corner of Judaism… of the basements of bestialization and filth… in order to enforce a blood thirsty mad regime.
— “In the name of life and peace”, Yediot Ahronot, June 8 1989
(TMB comment – Amos Oz is a known writer. One of his books made it to the cinema – ” A Tale of Love and Darkness”, written and directed by Natalie Portman. He was a bleeding-heart liberal.)
The psychopathic image was enhanced by countless satire sketches as they were portrayed as lunatics, perverts and insane. Those are only two examples of an assignation campaign going on for decades.
The results are clearly shown on the eroded public image of each group. However, the erosion is different for every group.
The Didact’s Thoughts
Once again, my deep gratitude to our good friend Dawn Pine for this contribution. The entire article is a thought-provoking one and basically points out that the global “clash of civilisations” now underway actually has an internecine, fratricidal aspect to it that all of us tend to overlook.
By this, I mean that Western civilisation is not one giant monolithic bloc. It is in fact a number of disparate strands woven together into one big Western tapestry. And that is true. You can see the evidence all around you.
Consider Western Europe. The “European” civilisation has some serious divisions within it. The “northern” European nations think that the Mediterranean nations of Spain, Italy, and Greece are a bunch of lazy spendthrifts obsessed with napping and eating. Those same Mediterranean nations think that that the Germans, Dutch, and Scandis are spineless cucked-out wimps more interested in working themselves to death than in concentrating on what really matters in life.
The British left the EU and are increasingly happy about that fact. The Central European nations of Hungary, Poland, Czechia, and others think that the EU is a vampiric force of malevolent evil. The Balkans aren’t quite sure what to think, other than that the Serbians are basically little Russians and NOBODY likes the Kosovars and Musllims.
You can see the same divisions elsewhere in the rest of the Western world, and they are increasing and becoming more bitter by the day as tribal and other sub-national identities reassert themselves. This is inevitable and will play out pretty much as described above, with the never-to-be-sufficiently-cursed whorenalists and presstitutes of the (((media)))))))) doing their level best to vilify certain sectors of society to prop up those with whom they agree.
Where I disagree with the author of the article is in his tendency to characterise this as a split between “Left” and “Right”. This is, and has always been, a highly imprecise, if convenient, term of political categorisation. It originates with the aforementioned French Revolution – one of the worst mistakes that a misguided humanity has ever inflicted upon itself. The world is not divided into Left and Right, or even into Progressives and Conservatives. Rather, we have divided ourselves into globalists and nationalists.
There can be Left-wing nationalists and Right-wing globalists. Ultimately, future conflicts will be fought over identities, not political beliefs – the first supersedes the second.
Indeed, with respect to Progressives and Conservatives, the following epigram from G. K. Chesterton – a confirmed epigrammatist if there ever was one – helps clarify our thinking on the subject:
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob. This is called the balance, or mutual check, in our Constitution.
— Chesterton, G. K., Illustrated London News, 1924
That is quite correct. Conservatives haven’t been able to conserve one single damned thing, other than maybe the 2nd Amendment in the USA – and not much of that either, as it happens. The greatest mistakes of the Progressives have never been corrected, and most “conservatives” now accept as normal some of the dumbest ideas that the Left ever came up with.
What, then, is the future?
Well, the kumbaya Globalist Utopia that I was told to believe in when I was in school sure as shit isn’t going to happen. If we are VERY, VERY, VERY fortunate, we MIGHT be able to avoid all-out war between the West and China. The Russians have already made it extremely clear that they will brook no Western interference whatsoever in their politics, and rightly so. The Chinese are no better than the corrupt and evil Western globalist elites, and in some ways are significantly worse, but one thing that they CAN justifiably claim to be better about than their Western counterparts is in their willingness to defend their own national interests.
But the coming wars will also split Western societies apart at the seams. It is already happening in the West. America is breaking up along a variety of intra-civilisational lines – White vs non-White, urban vs Suburban, Red vs Blue, Coast vs Heartland. Britain is experiencing the same thing – City vs Suburban/Rural, Metropolitan vs Working-Class, North vs South, and so on. (Muslims have already become significant swing-vote blocs in a number of British constituencies where the Labour Party once counted on unshakeable working-class support – which has now switched to the Tories, weirdly.)
Prepare for the breaking. It is coming. And it will be upon us faster than any of us can imagine.
0 Comments