How Clearly Israel Is an Apartheid Country

On July 11th, the Washington Post headlined “Sen. Tommy Tuberville relents and says white nationalists are racist”, and reported that the Republican U.S. Senator from the (racist) state of Alabama was finally forced, by the Senate’s leading Democrat Charles Schumer from the state of New York, to say publicly that “White nationalists are racists” and even to say “I’m totally against racism.” Though the people who had voted for Tuberville didn’t consider his White nationalism to be repugnant, the vast majority of the American people do; and, so, Tuberville finally relented and reversed himself.

But White supremacism is only one type of racist fascism. There are many others. For example:

Israel defines a “Jew,” in its “Law of Return”, which was passed unanimously by the Knesset (Israel’s Parliament), on 5 July 1950. It gives only people with one or more Jewish grandparent, and their spouses, the right to Israeli citizenship. Its purpose was to exclude from citizenship the vast majority of Palestinians who do not have at least one Jewish grandparent. But who decides whether a particular grandparent was a “Jew”? Hitler’s Germany had faced the same intractable problem in their racism, because it is a racism that binds “race” with religion — and that therefore cannot and won’t deal with the problem of defining what a “religion” is.

Apartheid South Africa’s Apartheid laws separated South Africans into four different racial categories: “white/European,” “black,” “coloured (people of mixed race),” and “Indian/Asian.” In that country, white people – 15 percent of the South African population – stood at the top of society, wielding power and wealth. Black South Africans – 80 percent of the population (like Palestinians had been in Israel before there was any “Israel” — at least for thousands of years) – were relegated to the very bottom. So: instead of using as the criterion for its nationalism some undefined ‘religion’, it used as the criterion for its nationalism some subjective evaluation of a person’s darkness of skin-tone.

The only difference between Apartheid South Africa’s racist fascism and the racist fascism in Israel, is that whereas in Apartheid South Africa the races were defined by skin-tone; in Israel, it’s done by ‘religion’; in Apartheid South Africa, it was done by ‘darkness’ of skin-color. But, in BOTH countries, it really was ‘race’, and it left to an unavoidable subjective judgement, how to attribute the legal definition of “race” to a given person.

In both countries, just like in Hitler’s Germany, it is/was racist supremacism — just a different way of defining the ‘races’.

The same was true in American slavery, which was outlawed in 1865.

American taxpayers donate to Israel’s Government, each and every year, $3.8 billion, in order for Israel to purchase at least $3.3. billion of U.S.-made weapons. Section 1273 of the United States Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act of 2020, specifically authorizes that “not less than” $3.3 billion of the $3.8 billion will be spent each and every year on the products of American ‘Defense’ Department contractors such as Lockheed Martin — the weapons that Israel then uses in order to impose its racist fascism against Palestinians and against Shia-majority nations that are led by Iran, which nations support Palestinians against apartheid Israel and against America’s own apartheid Government, without whose assistance Israel would not have been able to maintain its racist fascism — its own system of apartheid — ever since 1948.

Why are U.S. taxpayers donating anything to Israel, which is a rich country and has always been not only racist-fascist (and considered so by Einstein) but an enemy of Americans? Is it to pump up America’s ‘Defense’ industry (especially the the owners of that Department’s contractors, whose net worths especially soar from this)?

On 25 March 2019, that same Charles Schumer who forced Tuberville to condemn White supremacism, embraced Israel publicly (at AIPAC, the Israeli money-funnel to U.S. politicians), and equated any opponent of it to being an “anti-Semite,” as-if there can’t be also some Jews who detest Israel. It was a condemnation of anyone — including any Jew — who opposes Israel: anyone who opposes ALL racist fascism. Most of his top campaign contributors are fronts for U.S. ‘Defense’ Department contractors such as General Dynamics. It’s how the ‘Defense’ Department’s gravy train is run. This is the permanent-warfare state. Currently, the U.S. Government spends around 53% of all of its congressionally and Presidentially authorized (or “discretionary”) annual spending on its military, and only 47% on all other purposes.

So: will Schumer now perhaps mirror Tuberville’s relent, and say “Nationalist Jews are racists” and even to say “I’m totally against racism”? Or will he instead continue to be selective about what type of racist-fascist he is? Do his voters even know that he is that?

The reader-comments to this article that I have seen at a site that allows reader-comments, suggest to me that a significant number of people believe that there should be more racism (and even more racist fascism), not less, but that it needs to be of ‘the right type’. What I find even more disturbing is that those tend to be the most up-voted reader-comments; so, perhaps there is a quiet majority of people who despise democracy and would prefer their type of racist fascism. Maybe those individuals believe that if there is to be a ‘race’-war, then they will benefit, somehow; and maybe they are psychopaths and therefore seek to benefit only themselves. I don’t understand irrationality, but that might be one way it functions. Perhaps that’s one of the reasons why racist-fascist politicians become elected to public offices — even to become, for example, the leading Democrat in the U.S. Senate.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.