By David Basch
I have mentioned in numerous of my postings the "moralism" which is a peculiar characteristic of Jewish leftists. When I use the terms "moralism" or "moralistic," I do not mean moral, but only "moral-like," a characteristic of imitating superficially what is moral -- the difference of being a virgin and "like a virgin." To be truly moral one must have the kind of integrity that makes you strive to understand a total situation before rendering judgement, something that never deterred the ignorant moralism of the leftists when they react to the enemy's propaganda.
These distinctions are very important because it is the combination of the attributes of moralism and ignorance that are resulting in Israel's self-destruction.
I thought of this as I was engaged in a discussion with a local Israeli, a man who served in the Golan. To my astonishment he was impressed by Syrian Ambassador Al-Shara in his recent press conference where Shara blamed Israel for starting the 1967 war. My Israeli friend agreed with Al-Shara. Said my moralistic friend, "Well Israel fired the first shot," a remark that supposedly means that Israel was responsible for the actual fighting. If this fellow is typical of how Israelis think -- he regularly reads Ha'aretz -- it is no wonder that Israel is today on the brink of dismemberment.
I tried to remind him that in 1967 the Arabs had massed on two fronts, the Golan and the Sinai, tying Israel up in knots as she had to call up her military reserves, all under the most blood curdling threats of Nassar of Egypt. As we know, Israel struck first militarily in this encounter and took the enemies by surprise. But does this mean that Israel started the war? Or did the war actually start when the enemy massed in threatening ways on two fronts?
Syria, which joined in this assault, was already engaged in military hostilities when it massed its troops on the Golan. It was the wisdom of Israel's leaders to preempt the strike that disarmed the enemy. Not only that, the nation that used its militarily strategic lands to threaten in a two front assault on Israel had put those lands on the chopping block and lost them forever. After all, if that nation, Syria, massed for attack even while it had those lands, the reason for its assault was not to regain lands it already had on the Golan. What motivated Syria was the opportunity to set Israel back so that one day Syria could gain what it regards as southern Syria, the lands of all of Israel.
That my Israeli friend was so ignorant and so identifying of himself with the propaganda of Israel's enemy seems a typical thing today of the modern leftist Israeli. What seems to motivate such Israelis is their moralism -- there goes that word again. They wish to pose to the world their superior righteousness. So obsessive is this desire to pose as moral that they are willing to accept the enemy's propaganda since taking such a position would superficially indicate that they are so moral that they are willing to go against their own national interest.
Notice that an Arab, no matter how ignorant he may be and no matter what facts are placed before him to contradict his false historical views, will staunchly defend his own national goals, one of which is to destroy Israel. Such Arabs are not afflicted by a pathological attachment to seeming rationality. The Arabs take a position that Israel must be destroyed by any means and stick to it and will not be deterred by evidence of any immorality in their goals as long as it affirms their Islam. That is why they are impervious to historical reason, unlike Israelis like my friend. Such Israeli persons take as truth the enemy's phony history as long as this feeds their narcissistic moralistic obsessions. But all they succeed in doing, when they are not doing damage to their nation, is to show themselves as thoroughly stupid and morally warped.
I would note for my Israeli friend's benefit, though he did not stay around to hear it -- he does not approve of learning things to contradict his moralistically induced drug-high -- was that at the conclusion of the 1954 (or 56) Suez War it was written into the agreement with Egypt that blockading the Gulf of Elat was to be "a causus belli," that is, "an act of war." Egypt did indeed blockade that port and in so doing had committed an act of war in 1967 before Israel acted. Those who took part in that aggressive war should pay the price, though my Israeli friend thinks that they SHOULD NOT on the basis of some super fictitious morality that the enemies of Israel are allowed to define and which seems credible to my ignorant, moralistic friend -- a winning combination for self-destruction.
Those with this mentality are capable of believing many impossible things before breakfast, such as that jackals will become vegetarian at the signing of a piece of paper and do not need to be restrained and that a victim, attacked many times, need not be careful of its safety when the potential attacker smiles. They are also the people that accept the ugliness, chaos, inanity, when it is not out and out filth, of what is called Modern Art when this is championed by the New York Times, the greatest desecrator of artistic standards in the world today. After all, when the moralistic poseurs get started on their high horse, they will stop at nothing to get to their self-induced high when it tells them that they are the most moral, sensitive, and fairest in the land.
And in the above description you will find that I have encompassed much of the Jewish community in the US today -- a people wise in their own eyes and slated for disappearance as they climb aboard everybody else's bandwagon to reach their high. This is a situation which the enemies of the Jews know all about as they offer the pottage of moralistic status to such Jews when they don't give them career rewards -- all for joining in the destruction of the Jewish people, which to such obsessed persons of Jewish origin is the highest of morality since that is what the enemies of the Jews have told them and since they believe this is not a high a price to pay for a moralistic appearance, at least to themselves.
We see this today (1/20/00) in the New York Pravda-Times in the article about 300 U.S. "Rabbis" who agree to give a part of Jerusalem to the same Arabs that are working assiduously to take over all of Israel. I have no doubt that these are the CIA infiltrated Reformed and Conservative types, whose religion is an abstract ethical culture that cannot differentiate savages from saints and whose highest mitzvos are achieving US State Department objectives and getting their name in the papers as certified paragons of high virtue -- a MORALISM that is their drug and which true morality, justice, and history will not be allowed to prevent.
David Basch is an architect and city planner in New York. He is also a political philosopher associated with the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies and an expert on Shakespeare's Jewish roots.