@aaondmiller2 anguish over the ‘Jewish Nation-state Bill’. Old Socialist comments


Mr. Miller resembles American Jurisprudence: a bottomless well of self-serving mendacity in service to an utterly shameful defense of ‘Manifest Destiny’ i.e. Imperialism & Exceptionalism , genocide, Jim Crow and Segregation and its Wars of Empire, among a long list of crimes. The American Law Court proclaims itself to be above Morality: call this Moral Exceptionalism. The Israeli State has proclaimed itself to be a Jewish Nation: call this Zionist Originalism!

Headline: Israel Passes Controversial Jewish Nation-state Bill After Stormy Debate

Sub-headline: 62 lawmakers vote in favor of the bill after a stormy debate

■ Arab lawmakers tossed out after they tear bill in protest, call it ‘apartheid law’


The fact that the Settlements have rendered moot the ‘Two State Solution’ , where dose that place Mr. Miller’s whole career as a Policy Technocrat? What the reader gets from Mr. Miller’s twitter post is resignation & dismay.

Mr. Miller will not confront that Israel is a European Settler State, born out of ‘Western Guilt’ over the Holocaust and the monuments to Imperialism Sykes-Picot and Balfour. What is of political moment for the Zionist State, is its policy of Ethnic Cleansing that has found  support from the Zionists at The New York Times: Stephens,Weiss, Friedman and Brooks. The nihilists mythology of ‘Exceptionalism’ rationalizes horrific crimes against the lesser beings of the planet earth.

In American Jurisprudential terms the decisions of Dred Scott, Buck v. Bell, Korematsu, Hirabayashi, and more recently the rise of the Federalist Society and its propaganda about an invented ‘Originalism’ produced Shelby County v. Holder. These decisions represent the recrudescence of American racism, while the ‘Jewish Nation-state Bill‘ is about what Hannah Arendt foresaw as the political destiny of Israel , to become Sparta.

Old Socialist






About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.