Israel, along with America, ranks at the top in terms of social inequality. In America, however, the inequality is fluid: most wealth is not inherited, and the list can change from generation to generation. In Israel, income distribution follows an oligarchic model: half of the wealth is concentrated in about twenty families. In America, income inequality is largely due to technological progress and market opportunities. Successful investors form the top 1 percent of earners while skilled professionals form the stable middle class. That’s not the case in Israel, where riches are unrelated to investment acumen but depend on close cooperation with the government. Israel also lacks a well-off middle class like America’s. In Israel, even skilled professionals barely make ends meet.

Western European socialist countries live off centuries of accumulated welfare. Their income distribution is close to the socialist model, but the rest of their economy is fairly free. They are spared the burden of military expenses. They don’t have an economically lackluster quarter of their population. Israel is different in every one of those aspects.

Like the communists, Israel initially embraced socialist economic regulation because it furthers political totalitarianism. The leftist state, bent on eradicating Judaism, could not accept economically independent citizens who would eventually sponsor Jewish—that is, anti-government—purposes. Israel still retains a truly communist level of business regulation which stifles private initiative and puts businessmen at the government’s mercy—while they are loyal.

Elites are necessarily cosmopolitan. Every person comfortably cooperates with his equals. Most Israeli professionals can find friends of similar social standing in Israel. But the Israeli “elite” is too small to find fellows in the country. Big businessmen and politicians seek friends and contacts abroad. The owner of an Israeli international corporation or Israel’s foreign minister cannot really wear Jewish religious garb in London, nor can they make an argument about Jewish chosen-ness for the Promised Land to justify holding on to Jerusalem.

Through the ages, the Jewish “elite” has been the most anti-Jewish force, closely cooperating with our enemies in Judenrat fashion. Israel cannot survive as a Jewish state while the “elite” have political power. And in a democratic state, it always has such power. Worse, power is also allocated to “artistic” opinion-makers: news anchors, brainless political commentators, actors, and singers. In their search for artistic freedom they reject any bounds, including the bounds of Judaism and Jewish interests.

Davidic monarchy would be nice, but Israel’s only practical choice is administrative autonomy on the settlements’ level. Every community should have the right to determine and enforce its own rules: of schooling, public appearance, religiosity, etc. Such ghettoization can shield Jews from the assimilated “elite.” Think of Judea.