Leftists have a habit of micro-analysis. They analyze only the last steps without seeing them as consequences of earlier decision or the macro picture. They demand that Israel gives back the Golan Heights without realizing that their occupation was not an Israeli offense, the primary wrong, but rather Israel’s way of defending herself, undoing the Syria’s wrong. It’s like complaining of police violently arresting a person while ignoring the fact that he is a wanted criminal.

The left ignores the big picture: they demand that Israel accommodates her Arabs. However, the Arab presence in Israel is only an uncompleted part of the exchange of populations: Israel took Jews from Arab countries, and Arab countries should take Arabs from Israel.

The habit of micro-analysis works against a suffering person or a state. Every step is taken for a blank slate, and good people are precluded from retaliating for past, even recent offenses. Such a restraint provokes aggression. Not only the world would scream at Israel for avenging the 1929 Hebron deaths, but avenging the yesterday’s casualties of rocket attacks in Sderot with today’s military operations in Gaza is deemed wrong. Arabs are lightly admonished for attacking Israel, and then Israel is lambasted for retaliation.

Consider another example. Jews claim the Promised Land from Nile to Euphrates. The League of Nations allocated us a modest strip of that land which included Transjordan. The British stole ¾ of that land to make a kingdom of Jordan for a few Bedouin. Jews swallowed the bitter pill and accepted the partition. But then, acted as if no Arab state had been carved out of the Jewish homeland, the UN carved a Palestinian state from what remained of Israel. After Jews agreed to that, too, the world now demands that Jews effectively give away the rest of our country by allowing Israeli Arabs to breed to majority.

Another instance of micro-analysis is the demand of Arab equality in Israel. Why in Israel? Let’s consider Arab-Jewish equality in the Middle East: Arabs have 22 countries with no Jews whatsoever, so the presence of a single Jewish country without Arabs doesn’t seem like an inequality. Just realize that Israeli Arabs are just a part of the large Arab ethnos. The leftist Supreme Court pressed the micro-analysis even further when it mandated Jewish villages to admit Arab residents; now the Jews cannot escape Arab presence even in secluded locations. On the ultimate micro-level - the family - the issue of equality also persists: no Israeli newspaper would publish “Arabs need not apply” in marriage classifieds for Jewish girls.

The micro-analysis allows leftists to concentrate on soft targets. There is plenty of evil around in this world, and wicked people are non susceptible to moralizing. No leftist ever tried to demand that Arab countries compensate the Jews who fled them around the 1948 for the property they left behind. It is much easier to push the Jews to allow the fourth generation of Arab refugees back in. Micro-analysis thus always benefits the wicked as it suggests the moralizers to switch away from the big picture of the real, hate-filled world onto the pockets of good people who try to isolate themselves from it. Micro-analysis attacks the less-than-ideal attitudes of good people instead of wasting its time on the immense atrocities of the wicked.

The left’s micro-view is their inbuilt characteristic. Leftists are primitive rationalists; their major premise is that every social issue can be analyzed, understood, planned, and solved. In such tremendously complex adaptive systems as societies, the described attitude requires the leftists to decidedly simplify everything. To them, Israel confronts some Palestinians, rather than Jews confront the Muslim avant-garde of the anti-Semitic world. The left dwell on the radically simplified issues stripped of the context because they are unable to apply their trademark analysis-design to the complex world.

And so they destroy the Jewish world of complexities.

Policies are predominantly wrong because any given position in the complex adaptive system has myriad options, and any one option is likely to not be the best option. Complex adaptive systems resist policies but develop through painfully long series of micro-moves. At every stage, situation changes and needs adaptive response. Policies, on the contrary, tend to be fixed and self-perpetuating; otherwise, they are derogatory called ad hoc solutions and don’t amount to policies.

It follows, that whatever a government does, it likely does wrong. Bismarck weaved the most excellent policies, but they laid a foundation for the two world wars. The League of Nations was a great idea, but it legalized the inaction which allowed Germany to re-arm. Partitioning states to satisfy both political camps seemed a viable strategy, but partitioned Vietnam fought a bloody war, and other cases proved equally unsustainable. Bleeding the communists in Afghanistan was a nice thing to do, but the aid to mujahedeen created the Islamic terrorist threat. It is not an overgeneralization to say that all policies are wrong. There are no examples of fruitful policies under the heaven.

Policies differ from methods. Working is good, though no work plausibly makes an average person billionaire; work is method, enrichment is a policy. Methods are useful in themselves while policies serve external goals. Methods can be described as derivative of policies, or as very short-term policies. Occupation of Iraq with the aim of making it democratic is a policy – wrong; punishing raid with the immediate aim of removing Saddam is a method – right. Method is a historically standard modus operandi: countries attack when threatened, punish offenders when they can, and secure their own habitat. Almost everyone agree on methods: both Jews and Arabs believe that offenders must be punished; punishment is a method. Methods have only immediate goals.

Methods rely on very short actions and are unlikely to create the Bradbury’s Butterfly effect of unforeseeable remote consequences. Most often, methods reinstate or secure status quo ante. Less frequently, methods prevent the unforeseeable developments: European settlers massacred Red Indians so that no significant minority is left to claim their ancestral lands.

How absurd it is to imagine a lion that enters a camp of gazelles to teach them manners, self-defense, or agriculture. No, lions are satisfied with the immediate goal of satiation – if at the gazelle’s expense. Peace process is of the same stock. Israel tried rejecting the Palestinian demands, succumbing to them, and every option in between. Nothing worked – because policies never work. The Middle East’s ecosystem is a textbook example of complex adaptive system. Any policy would be wrong here. Who could honestly predict that Arafat would refuse statehood which Barak gave him on the silver plate? Who knew Nasser’s mind in 1967, when he wanted to attack Israel? We don’t know whether Iran develops nuclear weapons or merely defends its right to conduct nuclear enrichment. There are myriad inherently unknown variables in the peace process equation. If Israeli Arabs are loyal, that calls for one solution; if they are not, the solution must be entirely different. If Palestinian Arabs want to live in peace with Israel, that’s one situation; if Gaza’s refugees would never accept a Jewish state, that’s a totally different situation. Would Egypt pursue a hostile peace with Israel, or would its Muslim radicals come to power and opt for a war?

Mid-term economic planning proved a communist failure, but democratic states plan something incredibly more complex than economy – human societies. The peace process will invariably fail. The only solution to Israeli-Arab conflict is to stop seeking a solution. Jews settled in the Middle East’s equivalent of inner town slums. Former residents can be sent to jails – or refugee camps – but they will keep coming back. If Jews lack a resolve for the biblically mandated solution, the only alternative is living through a smoldering conflict for centuries. That’s completely acceptable.

Many more Israelis are killed in car accidents than in terrorist acts.

There is unmistakable similarity between the Stalinist society laid bare by Koestler in his Darkness at Noon and the post-Zionist Israel. The defining characteristic of Stalinist society was a suppression of common morality now for the sake of attaining high ideals later. The ideals have to be sufficiently abstract so that the people won’t be able to evaluate whether the ends justify the means; besides being shiny, the ends are not clear. So in Israel. Zionists plunged to the depths of immorality such as hunting the fellow Jews (Kach, etc) without ever clarifying what they want to achieve. Just like their Russian counterparts spoke of the ultimate “worker’s state” while robbing and denigrating those same workers, Zionists declared a goal of the Jewish state without ever clarifying what “Jewish” means to them. Russian bureaucracy usurped the power in the name of workers; Zionist bureaucracy usurped the power while pushing religious and nationalist Jews onto the society’s persecuted fringes. Communists and Zionists were unable to formulate their goals because they had no clear goals. A short logical argument immediately demonstrates that planned socialist economy benefits the state rather than workers, and socialist Zionism opposes Judaism and Jewishness.

Koestler convincingly shows how the good communists were persuaded to submit to evil communists because the evil communists had currently the best chance of furthering the goals of communism. And so in Israel. Common Israelis believe the top political echelon, though corrupt and treacherous, works to uphold Zionist goals, and they submit to its rule. In the case of, for example, Baruch Goldstein it is evident that he could not have shot 150 Arabs with four cartridges. The guards, however, were persuaded to retract their testimonies so that the government could blame Goldstein for the “massacre” and disband the Kach party he belonged to. In another episode, many people in the sterile zone saw Rabin standing up and walking to his car after being “fatally shot” by Amir; dozens of medical personnel in the hospital knew that Rabin was fatally shot in the surgery room. All of them kept silent. It is impossible that all of them are cowards, submitting to Shin-Bet’s threats. Just like during the Soviet witch hunt trials, all of them were persuaded that temporary injustice justifies the shining ends of Zionism. Probably, just like the Koestler’s hero, they were offered an escape for their conscience: a possibility that at some remote date the truth will be allowed to stand and the non-guilty – acquitted. Israeli establishment can now afford to acquit Amir or Goldstein: Kach is dead, and the image of right-wingers stained irreparably. Indeed, they are all but formally acquitted: a majority of Israelis, polls show, don’t buy the official version of Rabin’s assassination. They, however, still don’t vote for the smeared right-wingers. Decades later, Kahane and Goldstein will be national heroes, just like today David Raziel and Avraham Stern, hunted by Zionists during their lifetime, became the official heroes; dead heroes don’t threaten the establishment.

Russian communists like the Koestler’s hero worked for the system. To rebel against the system was to admit one’s entire life efforts wrong. That was too much to bear. And so in Israel. Israelis suffer for the system from their early age. They risk their lives in buses, on the streets, and in the army. They see they dear ones killed or maimed. They suffer heavy taxation and international hostility. For common Israelis, to doubt the system is to admit their lifetime sacrifices futile.

Just like the communism, Zionism evolves. One notion having been discredited, the ruling clique embraces another. From Jewish state to a state with many Arabs to the state with looming Arab majority. From socialist state to atheist state to the state were the Supreme Court and the government direct rabbinical affairs. From zealously Jewish state to the state with affirmative action for Arabs and police pogroms in Jewish religious neighborhoods. It’s never possible to prove that the rulers betrayed their own goals because the goals are continuously adapted to the ongoing treachery.

Russia has never abandoned its Stalinist stature. Common Russians were silent in the face of their government blowing the houses in Moscow to instigate the war with Chechnya. They accepted transparent lies by the government just like their grandfathers accepted the ridiculous witch hunt trials. So does Israel. Jews were silent when Ben Gurion’s agents killed Arlozoroff or bullet-sprayed Altalena. Israelis, even conservatives, didn’t protest the government murdering Kahane or Zeevi.

Both communists and Zionists scored early successes by mobilizing near-free labor for ideologically inspired economic projects. Russian industrialization and Israeli agriculture leapfrogged due to the selfless labor efforts. But ideology quickly exhausts its economic potential as the societies grow, become diversified, and economic activities evolve too complex for straightforward planning. Initially more efficient than the conservative market-oriented economies, ideologically driven economies quickly fall behind, burdened by systemic distortions and lack of economic stimuli. Artificial ideologies are dangerous to minds, but also to pockets.

Israel has to abandon shining Zionism for the old-fashioned Judaism. The only alternative is communal death.

Responsible people take matters into their own hands and build states – at whatever cost. Then, they grow irresponsible and lose their countries. Historically, growing irresponsibility was related to affluence: people, safe and economically secure, distance themselves from the issues of statehood. They can afford the politicians’ occasional mistakes and don’t bother discharging their main duty as citizens: controlling the state. The recent decades saw a new road toward civil irresponsibility: ultra-long mass education.
Israel, like the early Communist Empire, uses schools to brainwash children who learn every Communist value from militant atheism to jingoism to sexual permissiveness. The last is especially important: both Israeli and Russian communists realized that sexual immorality (absence of restraints) is the surest way to destroy the traditional morality.

People used to work from childhood; they were responsible for their livelihood. The twelve-year school education changed that behavioral pattern. Eighteen-year-old adults are utterly irresponsible; they lack meaningful responsibilities. School education is about learning rather than questioning, and young adults grow subservient to authorities, used to accepting authoritative pronouncements unquestioningly. Secular school graduates obey government decisions and go to wars without a second thought; yeshiva students similarly accept rabbinical authority and participate in violent protests. Both groups are subservient to their masters. Ignorant Russian peasants rose up against tsar, but educated Jews accept the government surrendering Israeli depth of defense to Arab enemies and partitioning Jerusalem with Palestinian fedayeen. Ignorant Palestinians disregard Jewish aspirations, educated Jews are considerate of Palestinian aspirations; where's the compromise?

School education is wasteful. Students learn the things they will never need, and do so slowly. Schools are nearly useless as a way of professional orientation. Not only twelve-year-long orientation is absurd, but most pupils choose future occupations randomly, based on extraneous circumstances. School rarely makes them realize their professional predisposition. A decision to become a doctor or lawyer is unrelated to anything the person studied in school. On other hand, Aristotle realized that he wants to be a philosopher and Newton – physicist without going to high school.

Jewish learning was famously practical and so good that it allowed the Jews to over-achieve every other nation on earth in terms of intellectual productivity. Start reading and memorizing at three to five years, learn writing shortly afterwards – and then go choose a profession for yourself, all the while continuing work and Torah studies. Unlike bad yeshivas today, traditional Jewish educators taught children to think, analyze complex issues on religious examples. Students of Torah were prepared for every occupation.

Socialist ideas distorted societies. People used to work all their lives, but now the idea of 70- or 12-year-olds at work is anathema. Is it any better to waste time with computer games and TV? Children’s energy, now wasted, can be used for work. Twelve-year-olds can work few hours a day in cafes, fields – on many jobs. Still more suitably, they can engage in professional education, study in universities. They can marry at fifteen rather than thirty-five. Young people can live normal, full-fledged lives instead of being pressed into infantile existence.

But governments need irresponsible citizens, and welcome infantilism.

Anti-Semites note correctly the tremendous influence Jews exerted on the most negative political developments. Top Bolsheviks, as well as other socialist factions in Russia were disproportionally Jewish. Schizophrenic mixture of Jewish idealism, messianism, and contempt for Gentiles created an explosive Bolshevik substance. It is fun to shape societies. Planning a utopian society makes an atheist close to God. Assimilated, atheist Jews were truly rootless, as the derogatory Russian term had it. Rootless people are unburdened by traditions, historical experience, and morality. The ex-Jews ruthlessly enjoyed reshaping Russia.

Some of those rootless socialists spilled onto the land of Israel. Russian Jews dominated among them, but the cancer of socialism which kills Europe now like it killed Rome before, infected Jews before others. A lot of the first aliyah Jews from Western Europe had socialist leanings. Jews coming to Palestine sought to establish a new society. When Europeans colonized America, some idealists sought a new world order on the tabula rasa, but the majority wanted just a patch of land to develop. America, therefore, evolved into a capitalist society. Jewish society in Israel longed for a utopian community, and developed it in strides.
Jews were utopian to a varying degree. Some practiced the extreme form of communism, up to free sex and socializing of children at the collective farms. Some looked forward to heavily unionized socialism still with a private sphere. A few others wanted a heavily regulated capitalist society. While religious Jews isolated themselves in antiquated communities, Jewish majority renounced their roots and went on designing a perfect state.

That was the major reason for the first aliyah – building a perfect state. Jews could as well settle Uganda or Arizona, but nostalgic feelings directed them to the land of Israel. They didn’t care about the Promised Land, or they would have never agreed to the British carving Transjordan or Lebanon out of the Jewish land. They didn’t care about the religious issues, or they would have settled Hebron and Schem rather than Tel Aviv. The Jews were fed up with the ugliness of decaying anti-Semitic Europe and came to Israel to realize the socialist nightmare: a perfect society.

The actions of Zionist leadership are only explicable in this context. In 1947, they accepted a partition which left Israel with 40% fast-breeding Arab population. They gave up a major part of Israel, and almost the entire Promised Land. They instituted the most un-Jewish socialist economy. The only consistent line of their actions was designing a new society. They played God, overruling him in the process.

The new society could adopt an existing language: Americans took English, and Jews imagined German language (as did the Americans at one point) as official. Soon, Jews got a better idea: garbling the beautiful Hebrew language into the Israeli slang. In the typically sophist approach socialists are so fond of, Jews took an old and respected thing, changed its meaning, and arrived at an absurd. They filled Hebrew language mostly with Russian borrowings, unaware of the fact that Russian language has itself assimilated a lot of Hebrew concepts and structures. The Israeli language provided both a respect due to the Hebrew’ antiquity and the opportunity to design a new language.

Israeli music was the Soviet music of 1930s. Rich traditions of various Jewish communities were excised from the new society.
Israel developed new morals. It rejected Jewish values and morality, and designed new ones: sabra (Israeli redneck), Israeli (Arab-Jewish, wolf-n-sheep) nationality, and traditionalism (the Torah as antiquated saga – show some respect to it). Jewish values suddenly switched from Judaism to being nice and ethical (as if Gentiles are not).

Abrogation of Jewish values was accompanied with installing the kibbutz values of hard work, common property, and complete obedience to authorities. It is easy to destroy morality, but impossible to create a new one. Jews rejected the kibbutz values, and the resultant vacuum was quickly filled by everything from pop-culture to jingoism.

Jewish socialists, like their Russian counterpart, attacked the soft underbelly of morality: sexual relations. Israeli culture of sexual permissiveness made Jewish girls stereotyped around the world as of easy virtue. Israeli army promotes easy relations between sexes, and military insurance covers up to three abortions for nineteen-year old girls.

Socialist societies are always militaristic. They need external enemies to account for their own failures and divert citizens’ attention from them. Socialism, as any rationalism, is always expansive: it seeks to enforce the good upon others. Socialists have to control the media in order to excise common sense from public discourse, and the unchecked government-controlled media inflame militant nationalism to previously unseen level. Israeli leftists, accordingly, murderously hate the Arabs. They killed the Arabs in scores, evicted in hundreds of thousands, and oppress the others wherever they can, given the requirements of always superficial political correctness.

Israeli education emphasizes a deep split between Israelis and “old” Jews; the last bizarrely perished in Holocaust, but the former trample upon Arab armies. Jewish heroes are no longer the sages, but well-armed ignoramuses who man the socialist juggernaut.
Socialists always despised an educated person for he doesn’t buy their nonsense. They prefer dealing with ignorant masses. It is therefore important to keep the masses ignorant. Education introduces differentiation; a mass becomes lively assembly of opinionated individuals. Socialism doesn’t want such challenge to its authority. Technical education is fine, but no general education. Jewish socialists copied Stalinist policies of extremely low quality of undergraduate education. Education is semi-officially despised. Prototypical Israeli is not too smart, semi-educated tough kibbutznick with machine gun; that changes slowly under the influence of get-rich culture. Israeli school education has long hit the bottom. State of Israel uprooted twenty-three centuries of the exemplary Jewish education. One can be skeptical about international test results where Israeli students consistently score among the last, noting that the score is weighted down by very low capabilities of Israeli Arab students. Still, Israeli Jews score in the second dozen while in other countries Jews come on the top of test results. There is no solution to the Israeli school system mass-producing ignorance. School teachers are incredibly bad, the entire generation of them. They cannot be improved. Israel needs a lustration of teachers. Try bringing the best foreign teachers from low-wage countries such as India, though it is hard to find out a civilized country with wages lower than in Israel.

Socialism destroyed economy of the Jewish state. Masses of spongers from Arabs to elderly Russians who have never worked in Israel made a new yoke for taxpayers who rejected the heavenly yoke. No democratically elected government can afford to alienate those voting parasites.

The post-socialist political correctness made a sham of Israeli security in the eight-mile-wide borders and 1.5 million-strong fifth column of Arabs living here. The peace process which gives Judea to the Arabs formally ends the Jewish state project.

Israel is not the first attempt to re-create the Jewish state. We must ensure that it won’t be the last. We must save Jewish children from the Israeli socialism.

Conservatives are simpletons. They cling to old ways and resist progress. Though time-tested, their ways are unfashionable and unscientific. Science is an experimental approach; in social issues, experiments are performed on humans. Conservatives lack the bright ideas which would dramatically improve the situation; the stubborn conservatives maintain that bright ideas never work in social relations. Conservatives condemn the world to an irritatingly slow pace of development through minor trials, errors, and adjustments. They reject the self-evident notion that peace can be achieved through negotiations and insist on the old-fashioned victory. Conservatives don’t believe that great minds shape societies, and maintain that societies develop on their own. Conservatives insult great politicians by doubting their role and influence.

The left are smart, educated, active, and well-organized. They achieve well, and easily beat the conservatives either in public debates or in politics. The left clear the scene for themselves, act, proved wrong, and act again. The left manipulate the masses and therefore depend on collective action. It is impossible to gather masses for a good purpose; people only unite out of fear or hatred. The best hope is to direct the evil collective action against a greater evil; that’s called a war of liberation. People don’t want freedom per se; family and job obligations leave little place for freedom in daily lives. Rather, people want freedom from those they hate, and so the wars of liberation are actually the wars of (justified?) hatred, against a hated oppressor. The left, therefore, are themselves hateful and unleash the power of hatred in masses. Witness zigzags of Israeli politics.

Haim Ramon is a centrist vice prime minister (the prime minister of vice, indeed). He is a convicted sexual offender. Not really a rapist, but forcibly kissed a soldier girl – a soldier who might as well die one day defending the likes of Ramon. At the same time, Ramon did an immensely important job of reining in the activist Supreme Court. Ramon fought the court’s most egregious excess: internal appointment of judges. That’s not a joke: Israeli Supreme Court opted for real independence and started appointing its own judges. The Supreme Court thus evolved into a black box churning out ultra-left verdicts with no legislative input. Back in the office after serving a mild sentence, Ramon conspired with Fatah to abandon Judea and partition Jerusalem. He criticized Ehud Barak, of the leftist Avodah Party, for right-wing views when Barak doubted that Fatah can uphold any security promises. Then, Ramon slammed Israeli government for abandoning its earlier decision to cut electricity supply to the hostile Gaza.
Ramon’s policies can be superficially designated as non-religious nationalism: he wants security for Israel but doesn’t care about religiously or historically significant places. That is a typically leftist attitude of creating artificial entities – in this case, an Israeli nation bereft of any religious or historical connections. But Ramon is smart, and cannot imagine security for Israel locked in 8-mile-wide borders. Ramon is an experienced politician and knows that concessions only embolden Arabs for further demands; they won’t stop even at partitioning Jerusalem. The only firm line in Ramon’s politics is hatred, the hatred of everyone and burning desire to manage and reform - the desire of power. Hatred and power, that’s what the leftism is about. Ramon equally hates the Jews and the Arabs. He gladly strips Jewish judges of their mammoth power, makes religious Jews suffer by abandoning Judea and Jerusalem, and oppresses the Arabs in Gaza. Ramon personifies evil, but he is not the only one.

Condi Rice is a quintessence of leftism. She's a patently lame scholar (and yes, I've read her essays) whose theories border on scam. In her essay on nuclear weapons, she repeatedly cites the Soviet WWII encyclopedia in fifty-something volumes, which even the native Russian speakers find impossible to read through; she obviously relies on secondary sources without citing them. Rice succeeded through the affirmative action, a semi-official quota for Black professors of lamentable credentials. Bush took her into the Administration for the same reason, to earn a few Black votes for the Republicans. Thereafter, Rice got a chance to vindicate her non-existent academic credentials. The affirmative action princess devised moronic political theories and took the entire states for lab mice – the leftism. Democratic elections were imposed on Lebanon and Palestine, assuredly bringing Hamas and Hezbollah to power. Two billion dollars of the US taxpayers' money where pumped into Ukraine to subvert pro-Russian presidential candidate and install a powerless clown whose party lost the elections a few months afterwards by an overwhelming margin. Desperately trying to salvage a working policy, Rice always stays one step behind the events: she bugs friendly Russia with absurdly useless anti-ballistic missile micro-installations in Eastern Europe, and pats the hostile Russia on the shoulder with concessions. Instead of accepting the practical, proven solution in Iran – destroying its military facilities, Rice tries academic prescriptions and politicking such as the toothless sanctions. As a quintessential leftist academic, really an ignoramus full of pompous ideas, Rice wants to reform the states. Thus her obsession with democratizing nuclear Pakistan; oh yeah, let the ultra-corrupt Bhutto and her Islamist cronies receive the nuclear button in democratic elections. That General Musharaff who desperately keeps the Pakistani nukes safe – he is yeah, a bad guy.

Rice alone is responsible for the US standoff with Russia. The purported "expert" on Russia's military, Rice has not a clue about Russian politics or mentality. She engineered the entirely unnecessary conflicts on the Russian periphery, notably the putsches in Ukraine and Georgia. What has America to do with an ex-Soviet republic of Georgia, a Christian kingdom for centuries in the Russian sphere of influence whose population absolutely depends on Russia for everything? Xenophobic Russians were predictably agitated to the point of withdrawing from the major military treaties, resuming the effective nuclear alert, and patrolling the outskirts of Europe with strategic bombers. Appeasement is not a policy, but neither is provoking one's enemy a containment.

Of the same stock are Rice's experiments with Israel. She is both contempt of Jews and finds them amenable; Rice is not educated enough to know that Jews are amenable only to an extent. In order to understand her policy regarding Israel, it is critical to see how important is that single experiment to the ignorant Black academic. For Rice, the Israeli-Arab solution is more than a matter of politics; it is a matter of academic credibility. Soon out of the office for good, she desperately needs that single lab work. Regardless of its result. Rice would love to succeed in her experiment on the Jewish mice, but failure is still a result in lab work.

And so Rice pushes Israel back to the 1956 borders, an 8-mile-wide country without Jerusalem, surrounded by the triumphant Arab enemies. And the famed Jewish lobby is again proved powerless.

From Vietnam to Iraq, media demonstrated its destructiveness to national war effort. Media discredits the government, stigmatizes the military, and broadcasts enemy propaganda speeches. No enemy could dream of a better fifth column that the liberal media. Censorship is an instinctive response, but it would weed out the legitimate critique of governments. Vociferous critics of the Iraqi war benefit the American public. Societies wondrously regulate themselves. American media, including tabloids, was united in favor of defeating Germany and Japan. Roosevelt’s actions offered ample ground for criticism but the media were mostly compassionate to his cause.

Media are not anti-social, but only seek attention. Journalists want to lead the public, and media owners want revenues which are also a matter of popularity. Media rides on public sentiment. When the Americans were overwhelmingly pro-war in the 1940s, the media could not afford to be anti-war. The public was uncertain about the Iraqi war, and media gained reputation by opposing the government. Media present no problem in sensible wars.

Jews stay in Israel for love or money. Socialist oligarchic economy leaves enterprising Jews with fraction of salaries they can enjoy in the US. Israeli government pressures the US into limiting the work visas for Israelis to decrease emigration from Israel. Habits and personal connections keep many Jews from moving out of Israel, but in the end money matters. Ideology can stop emigration for a while, but Israeli government deliberately expunges Jewish ideology. It brainwashes children in schools with dogmatic leftism and in the army with democracy. Even normal nationalism of the help-neighbors-kill-enemies kind is suppressed, declared Slavic totalitarianism. Jews see no reason to stay in Israel full of Arabs instead of moving to Toronto full of much nicer Canadians. Twists of the government line made Israelis cynical and resilient to propaganda.

Just 19 oligarchic families control more than half of Israeli GDP. Elections became an enterprise of fooling voters with media ads. Oligarchs finance elections. Politicians answer to oligarchs. Shadowy billionaires like Martin Shlaff lurk behind Israeli relations with Palestine and Lev Levaev – behind Israeli Russian policy. IDF presence in the West Bank gives Jewish oligarchs profitable monopolies, and both active-duty and retired security officers further oligarchs’ interests abroad. Free market economy will produce independent businessmen who will sponsor right-wing parties; it will also bankrupt oligarchic monopolies. Both government and big businesses resist economic liberalization.

Democratic, voter-dependent Israel can never abandon socialist welfare and ethnic-blind liberalism. A tiny fraction of Jews is motivated, but most move from the USSR for economic advantages. They have no right to vote on the issues of Jewish state. Israel has to switch from democracy to republicanism and create free-market Jew-only state. Any other entity would succumb to emigration.

Leftists are not necessarily selfless philanthropists. Just like other people, they sue in court those who infringe on their property and they refuse to open their houses for free use by the needy. Yet the leftists demand that Israel gives the land away to Arabs and allows Arab migrant workers into Israel. Leftists routinely defend property, but they don’t view the land of Israel as Jewish property. Land is unquestionably an asset, so in effect the leftists have no notion of Jewishness. Rational leftists don't comprehend the subtle, irrational concept of Jewishness. The land is equally fine with them whether in Jewish or Arab hands. Talking to Jewish leftists is as senseless as trying to convince Polynesians: both have no idea what Jewishness means. For both, Jewish nation is not a subject of property rights.

Some leftists identify themselves with Jews. Though they lack the notion of Jewish property, they have the idea of "my property." They defend the land as their own asset. Good enough. Still others resent to be bullied by the West into concessions to Arabs. That’s also an acceptable motive. Generally, however, leftists multiply their cowardice by the absence of a goal to struggle for, and sue for peace – at any price to the Jews.