INTO THE FRAY: The “pussification” of the Israeli right

For your perusal, my latest INTO THE FRAY column:

INTO THE FRAY: The “pussification” of the Israeli right

(Kindly consider “liking”, sharing, tweeting – please use hash-tag ‪#‎IntoFray)

Astonishingly, having been proved entirely justified in its condemnation of the dangerous defects of the “Left’s” political credo, the “Right” proceeded to embrace it

It appears this week on the following sites (in alphabetical order):

ISRAEL RISING: (To be posted) `

Several short excerpts:

Pussification: The act or process of pussifying… Pussify: To make weak and effeminate – Collins online dictionary

In the day-to-day political discourse, the current Netanyahu-led coalition is frequently referred to as the “most Right-wing” ever in Israel’s political history.

This is, of course, totally absurd.

The extinction of the “Right” as we once knew it

The signing of the Oslo Accords, 1993
The signing of the Oslo Accords, 1993

… the “Right”, as it once was on the eve of the Oslo process, is totally extinct in terms of the substantive content of its then-political credo…True, in terms of organizational labels of what are commonly accepted as denoting “Left” and “Right”, political factions labelled as “Right” have regularly defeated their adversaries labeled as “Left” in parliamentary elections and, in fact, have for almost the last decade, comprised the ruling coalitions.

“Right’s” organizational victory and ideological defeat

… although the “Right” retained its formal organizational structure, the substance of its ideological contents was dramatically transformed. What was once taboo was now acceptable…Indeed, today, the declared policy of the Likud, the leading faction of the “Right,” is essentially the same as that of the far-Left Meretz faction in the early 90s: …

Crossing the ideological Rubicon

Indeed, in the wake of Oslo and up until recent years, the “Right” focused its energies in (rightly) condemning the dangerous defects of the concessionary policy of political appeasement and territorial withdrawal that the “Left” had embarked upon—without ever offering an actionable prescription of its own…With no comprehensive, countervailing policy paradigm to promote or defend, the “Right” found itself gradually forced to give way … and to adopt increasing portions of the failed formula it had once rejected.

Astonishing ideological capitulation

Elyakim Ha’Etzni
Elyakim Ha’Etzni

In light of the unequivocal repudiation of the “Left’s” political doctrine by recalcitrant realities, one might have reasonably expected it to have been utterly vanquished by a victorious “Right”…Sadly, this was not the case… Elyakim Ha’Etzni, the doyen of the traditional “Right”, wrote recently in a piercing lament (Hebrew):

“When I raised the ‘heretical’ idea that Israel should take renewed responsibility for Areas A and B in Judea-Samaria and the Gaza Strip, I found little enthusiasm for it even in Right wing circles. Does this mean that even the “Right” is willing to divide the Land … If so, what remains of its ideological base?”

Operational paralysis?

Israeli fields set ablaze by incendiary kites from Gaza
Israeli fields set ablaze by incendiary kites from Gaza

But it is not only on the ideological level that the “Right’s” retreat has constricted its political efficacy. The same is true regarding operational responses on the ground.

Indeed, as Ha’Etzni points out: “Not only ideology, but also reality repudiates any attempt to evade the responsibility that necessarily arises from our right over the Land, all the Land”.

Misplaced moderation

Rockets fired at Israel from Gaza
Rockets fired at Israel from Gaza

The perceived need to preserve the Palestinian-Arab collective as a prospective interlocutor for some future non-belligerency arrangement in the future has, paradoxically (or not) prolonged the very belligerency it was intended to end…[B]y inflicting only “proportional” (read, “acceptable”) damage on the Palestinian-Arabs—by avoiding inflicting “unacceptable” damage—Israel is in fact signaling that it is prepared to tolerate their Judeophobic aggression against it—and its people

The other required “Victory”

The third detrimental consequence of the “Right’s” compliance with Left-wing parameters (apart from the previously mentioned ideological and operational ones), is that it permits the “Left” to avoid admitting its disastrous error. Indeed, many on the “Right” have been at pains to convince the “Left” that it can in fact “live with” their policy proposals, which do not preclude much of the political parameters sanctified by the “Left”.

An end to pussification?

….In the final analysis, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, there can—and eventually will—be either total Jewish sovereignty or total Arab sovereignty. The side that will prevail will be the side whose national will is the strongest and whose political vision is the sharpest. If that is to be the Jews, the “Right” needs to arrest the current process of “pussification” it appears to be undergoing.

This is not radical right wing extremism or religious fundamentalism. It is just sound political science.

As usual your talkbacks/comments/critiques welcome,
Best wishes,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *