It’s easy to see why some (many) anti-semites admire Israel: it’s a model ethnostate. It’s also ‘somewhere to put the Jews’, a seemingly benign (even philosemitic), less bloody solution to ‘the Jewish question’ in the West. Of course, believing in a ‘Jewish Question’ at all is clearly anti-Semitic. It’s precisely for this reason that anti-Zionist European Jews objected to the idea of a Jewish State. Marcus Garvey and the Back to Africa movement made common cause with the KKK; a similar dynamic is at work here.
The authoritarian nationalist crowd loves to support brutal Israel policy against Palestinians exactly because it is a prominent failure of liberalism and the post-WW2 order on display for the world to see.
“see, your touchy-feely human rights and equality under the law doesn’t actually work when you have nonwhite people in the mix. You need to point guns at the violent brown-skinned people to establish order (and sometimes shoot them to teach lessons.) This is the only stable power structure in the long term if you are going to insist on multiculturalism.”
Israel is the only respectable receptacle for liberal ethno nationalism after the holocaust. After all, who could object to a people subject to an attempt at physical erasure, claiming land and stamping on the face of those who lived there before? Surely those people couldn’t be as important as the people who claimed that the land they occupied gave the lie to weakness and death? A symbol, as it were, of resurrection.
Are you seeing what’s happening in Europe with far right parties? Ethnonationalism is being asserted , perhaps implicitly, across all of Europe. Also, isn’t Ukraine a legitimate liberal ethnic nationalism?
I think for that younger fash crowd, no number of war crimes can make any Jewish nation-state "respectable". In their eyes, while other races can found their nation-states on genocide, a genocidal "nation" with too many Jews in it will always be suspect for primarily that reason, especially "Israel".
It should be pointed out that many of the neocons are Jews. It is in their self interest to support equal rights for minorities at home, and, at the same time, insist that the survival of Israel depends on the subjugation, if not the elimination, of the Palestinians.
Yes. Not all the time, but in the context of Israel, it is a perfect example of using a people with a long history of being persecuted to carry the banner of US hegemony while denying the legitimacy of Palestinian nationalism. Greater Israel is also fighting in and expanding its dominance over Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Cyprus, and Iran.
This contradiction is well illustrated in the way Steve Bannon managed to fill a message about supporting Israel with antisemitic tropes, in an interview at CPAC, right after his nazi salute : “People in Israel gotta understand something: The number one enemy to the people in Israel are American Jews that do not support Israel and do not support MAGA. Okay? MAGA and the evangelical Christians and the traditional Catholics in this country have Israel’s back. They have the Jews’ back. The single biggest enemy to the Jewish people are not the Islamic supremacists. The biggest enemy you have is inside the wire: progressive Jewish billionaires that are funding all this stuff.”
Amen, with one small reservation. I think you're being unfair to the neocons, but only a bit. They didn't quite believe in fascism abroad. They believed that American force of arms could create a pro-Israel liberal democracy everywhere, with a halal McDonald's on every street corner. Operationally, this might translate to fascism abroad. But it is ideologically distinct. It would be touchingly naive, except for the very real power they exercised and violence they executed.
Also most of the neocons are very anti-Trump now. Kristol of all people is one of the sharpest voices against Trump and Co. The Bulwark defends Mamdani more than some Democrats.
If the far right's support for Israel is the model, you can easily imagine that they'd want to take the concept global - creating colonial outposts around the world to sow chaos or control resources. I'm thinking in particular of the threats against Venezuela recently.
I wonder who else had an idea to create an empire of racist client states? There might even be a German name for it...
This is very good stuff, but y'know, all those quotes that show clearly what Israel is "for" in the minds of many conservative policy leaders can be summed up this way: Israel is to them a crusader state by proxy.
Unfortunately Hazony-ism appears to be the most popular advocate of some form of nationalism at the moment, ceding the ground to far right parties who follow him. There are alternatives. Consider Yael Tamir for instance. As I noted below much of Europe is asserting the primacy of some version of ethnic nationalism in the fact of immigration, even if implicitly, and the left is beginning to adjust their policies accordingly.
It’s easy to see why some (many) anti-semites admire Israel: it’s a model ethnostate. It’s also ‘somewhere to put the Jews’, a seemingly benign (even philosemitic), less bloody solution to ‘the Jewish question’ in the West. Of course, believing in a ‘Jewish Question’ at all is clearly anti-Semitic. It’s precisely for this reason that anti-Zionist European Jews objected to the idea of a Jewish State. Marcus Garvey and the Back to Africa movement made common cause with the KKK; a similar dynamic is at work here.
Good stuff John, I see it very similarly.
The authoritarian nationalist crowd loves to support brutal Israel policy against Palestinians exactly because it is a prominent failure of liberalism and the post-WW2 order on display for the world to see.
“see, your touchy-feely human rights and equality under the law doesn’t actually work when you have nonwhite people in the mix. You need to point guns at the violent brown-skinned people to establish order (and sometimes shoot them to teach lessons.) This is the only stable power structure in the long term if you are going to insist on multiculturalism.”
Israel is the only respectable receptacle for liberal ethno nationalism after the holocaust. After all, who could object to a people subject to an attempt at physical erasure, claiming land and stamping on the face of those who lived there before? Surely those people couldn’t be as important as the people who claimed that the land they occupied gave the lie to weakness and death? A symbol, as it were, of resurrection.
Are you seeing what’s happening in Europe with far right parties? Ethnonationalism is being asserted , perhaps implicitly, across all of Europe. Also, isn’t Ukraine a legitimate liberal ethnic nationalism?
"As in society in general, there is a considerable age gap in support for Israel in the conservative movement."
My guess though is that on the right this is not because of any particular concern for the plight of Palestinians but a lot of young right-wing groypers are fully Nazi anti-Semitic like Fuentes and think all the bad old stereotypes of the Jews are true or pretend them to be. There is at least one Leo Frank truther in the Trump admin: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/may/23/harvard-university-international-students-donald-trump-republicans-democrats-us-politics-latest-news
There are other Nazis too.
So I wouldn't call this good per se.
I think for that younger fash crowd, no number of war crimes can make any Jewish nation-state "respectable". In their eyes, while other races can found their nation-states on genocide, a genocidal "nation" with too many Jews in it will always be suspect for primarily that reason, especially "Israel".
It should be pointed out that many of the neocons are Jews. It is in their self interest to support equal rights for minorities at home, and, at the same time, insist that the survival of Israel depends on the subjugation, if not the elimination, of the Palestinians.
Should that really be "pointed out?"
It's the JOOS is catnip it seems that cannot be missed
Yes. Not all the time, but in the context of Israel, it is a perfect example of using a people with a long history of being persecuted to carry the banner of US hegemony while denying the legitimacy of Palestinian nationalism. Greater Israel is also fighting in and expanding its dominance over Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Cyprus, and Iran.
This contradiction is well illustrated in the way Steve Bannon managed to fill a message about supporting Israel with antisemitic tropes, in an interview at CPAC, right after his nazi salute : “People in Israel gotta understand something: The number one enemy to the people in Israel are American Jews that do not support Israel and do not support MAGA. Okay? MAGA and the evangelical Christians and the traditional Catholics in this country have Israel’s back. They have the Jews’ back. The single biggest enemy to the Jewish people are not the Islamic supremacists. The biggest enemy you have is inside the wire: progressive Jewish billionaires that are funding all this stuff.”
In Herzl's slight defense, this quote is from the Jewish State, where he was pandering to imperialists so that they'd support a Jewish state to be established in Palestine rather than in Argentina. The rampart rhetoric is also taylored for this audience : https://learninglink.oup.com/access/content/von-sivers-3e-dashboard-resources/document-excerpts-from-theodor-herzl-the-jewish-state-1895
Amen, with one small reservation. I think you're being unfair to the neocons, but only a bit. They didn't quite believe in fascism abroad. They believed that American force of arms could create a pro-Israel liberal democracy everywhere, with a halal McDonald's on every street corner. Operationally, this might translate to fascism abroad. But it is ideologically distinct. It would be touchingly naive, except for the very real power they exercised and violence they executed.
Also most of the neocons are very anti-Trump now. Kristol of all people is one of the sharpest voices against Trump and Co. The Bulwark defends Mamdani more than some Democrats.
If the far right's support for Israel is the model, you can easily imagine that they'd want to take the concept global - creating colonial outposts around the world to sow chaos or control resources. I'm thinking in particular of the threats against Venezuela recently.
I wonder who else had an idea to create an empire of racist client states? There might even be a German name for it...
What a shit show! Thanks.
This is very good stuff, but y'know, all those quotes that show clearly what Israel is "for" in the minds of many conservative policy leaders can be summed up this way: Israel is to them a crusader state by proxy.
Unfortunately Hazony-ism appears to be the most popular advocate of some form of nationalism at the moment, ceding the ground to far right parties who follow him. There are alternatives. Consider Yael Tamir for instance. As I noted below much of Europe is asserting the primacy of some version of ethnic nationalism in the fact of immigration, even if implicitly, and the left is beginning to adjust their policies accordingly.