The long march to destroy Israel
[I should mention that Saul Alinsky drfew heavily from the thoughts of Antonio Gramsci mentioned below.]
In the 1930s, Italian communist Antonio Gramsci advocated the “long march through the institutions” as the most effective means for communism to prevail in the Western democracies. He sought to overthrow capitalism and enthrone an authoritarian ideology he sincerely believed would usher in an age of equality and social justice. History has conclusively proven him to have been wrong. Gramsci disagreed with the methods of his contemporary compatriots, the Bolsheviks, who were implementing communism in Russia through violence, or what they called revolution. Gramsci’s tactics involved quietly infiltrating and then dominating cultural institutions, the media, academe, foundations, the arts, and to use those resources to impose an informal cultural dictatorship. Gramsci understood that by controlling the culture, what Marx called the “means of communication,” communism could be imposed under another name and in such a way that the democracies would find themselves asleep at the switch.
The Gramscian method is now being attempted as a means of undermining and eventually destroying the state of Israel. All of this would of course be moot if the speedier Bolshevik approach employed by Iran under Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah and Hamas proxies firing missiles and their development of a nuclear bomb is successful. Well-meaning liberals, including an increasing number of pro-Israel Jewish liberals, are incrementally moving away from believing in Zionism as a moral and ethical force in the same way the Gramscians of previous generations gradually moved liberals away from free-market democracy. Zionism, it should be stated, is the national aspirations of the Jewish people in the modest state of Israel, nothing more and nothing less.
To truly understand anti-Israel vitriol in Middle East read Morse’s “The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj Amin Al-Hussein”
The line of reasoning employed, and couched in the type of intellectual sophistries and sweeping moral jargon the left is used to hearing, is that Israel, as a Jewish state, is a “theocracy” that should be replaced by a morally superior secular democracy where Jews and Arabs share the land in a perpetual state of equality and social justice. Some Palestinians have even offered the profound and astonishingly magnanimous concession that Jews might even be allowed to continue to live in such a state as an appeal to those who V.I. Lenin called useful idiots. Washington Examiner columnist Asaf Romirowski reports that Palestinian lawyer and activist Jonathan Kuttab wrote in the L.A. Times that, “Zionism will ultimately need to redefine its goals and aspirations, this time without ignoring or seeking to dispossess the indigenous Palestinian population. Palestinians will also have to deal with this reality, and accept – even enthusiastically endorse – the elements required to make Jews truly feel at peace in the single new state that will be the home of both people.”
J Street is an American lobbying and advocacy group that is particularly vulnerable to the tender ministrations of the Gramscians. Made up of mostly American Jewish liberals, J Street advocates the so-called two-state solution to the degree that they apply pressure on the U.S. government to coerce Israel into negotiations with the Palestinians even though Gaza is under the direct control of the Iranian-sponsored Hamas. Israel had previously handed Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority on a silver platter, ethnically cleansed of its Jewish population, with the hope that the Palestinians would use the opportunity to create a responsible and sovereign Palestinian Arab state. Israel, along with the U.S. taxpayer and other nations, provided Gaza with money to assist the state in the making. The Palestinians were handed an opportunity, one of many going back almost a century, to create a prosperous and free society existing peacefully alongside Israel. Instead, Gaza became a launching pad for thousands of missiles launched against Israel. J Street and their ilk ignore these facts and push forward in pressuring the Obama administration to pressure Israel to yet again lop off another slice of land. President Obama has been more than happy to comply.
By not acquiescing to this utopian idea, the Gramscians portray Israel as obstructing their definition of the peace process. They wrap the Palestinians, who would otherwise have access to the resources of the oil-rich Arab nations and U.S. taxpayer money if they truly sought the road to peace, as the poor victims. At the same time, and for public consumption, they claim that the carving out of another Arab state west of the Jordan River would be a step toward peace. History and present realities, particularly in Gaza, indicate that a significant proportion of the Arab population west of the Jordan will never recognize a Jewish state, and the tactics employed, whether Gramscian or Bolshevik, prove this – not that any proof is necessary.