I’ve always been somewhat baffled by the extent of the right-wing’s defense of Israel. Apart from the easily explainable geopolitical and religious (which I have perspicaciously written about) considerations, there’s always been a deeper fervor there, something I never quite understood, something that seemed so strange. Recently, an explanation clicked for me: Israel is the right’s id. It’s what they wish they could be, if unconstrained.
To be backed by insurmountable military power (and not pay for it!). To use that might to viciously destroy those who are Other: to take their land and their farms, to imprison them in concentration camps, to deny them food, water, dignity. And then to keep using them as the target for every primal, cruel urge: to, as amusement, spit at them, entomb their wells, shoot at their limbs, run them over with tanks. To render alternatives to this system unthinkable: within, to sublimate this system into a common telos, creating its own fervent, instinctive defense everywhere; outwith, to form a wide consensus that suppresses any discussion or criticism.
Whenever right-wingers say they “stand beside Israel”, the spatial arrangement is inaccurately stated: it’s Israel that stands within them, not too deep inside.
Uh! Ah! Stay tuned for more takes! such as “people who ‘prefer dogs to people’ do it because they can’t deal with the realities of reciprocity and complexity of human relationships”, “dogs are to women as online porn is to men, no further comments”, “dogs are like cars: noisy, dirty, occasionally dangerous, occupiers of others’ space, and allowed to continue harming others with impunity due to a fanatical defense held by their mostly-unhinged, overly-influential owners”. Or, on this topic, check out Numb at the Lodge.
Confissões de um gajo possuído 