Melanie Phillips has given up her Monday column in the Daily Mail. I expect that this is as much about emBooks, several of which I have bought and read, as
anything else. Even Melanie Phillips can only find so many hours in the day.
Who is going to replace her? John Laughland? Geoffrey Wheatcroft? Mark Almond?
Freddy Gray? Stuart Reid? Ed West? Peter Oborne? Tim Stanley? The Mail titles have been going paleocon
for years, with Peter McKay, Andrew Alexander, Stephen Glover,
Peter Hitchens, Alex Brummer and others, regular and occasional.
RightMinds already features Thomas Fleming. Also from across the Atlantic might come those whom Freddy
Gray used to edit on PostRight. With no intervention in Syria by anyone outside
the region, neoconservatism is a busted flush.
There seems to be something about Phillips's downright bizarre appearance on Question Time in June. She complained, not without cause, that in 1982 a
colleague on The Guardian had referred to the war between Israel and Lebanon
as "your war". Yet in 2013, she left us in no doubt what she meant by
"Western interests". She referred to Israel as "us". Twice.
It was very sad to watch. How long had she been
doing this? Yet she insulted the audience. She was losing it. She might
already have lost it. And I had defended her in the past. Not because I agreed
with her, but because of the explicit misogyny and implicit anti-Semitism of
some of her more abusive critics. I still think that on many domestic policies,
hers is an important voice. As she demonstrated against Russell Brand when the
topic for discussion was drugs.
In relation to Syria, she also talked about a
current actor called "the Soviet Union". There could be no denying
that there were those for whom this one had the lot: the chance to attack all
five of Iran, the beating heart of pan-Arabism, the defenders of Lebanon's
southern frontier, the ancient indigenous Christians of the Levant (and of
Iran), and the power against which they themselves harbour an ancestral
bitterness which during the Cold War became bound up with Trotskyism and thus
made a doubly important contribution to the emergence of neoconservatism.
Thus did the Ramshackle Nasty Empire, which was
always going to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions, and which
was never a viable or even an aspirant military threat to the West, become the
Evil Empire, like something out of Star Wars.
Those overlapping hostilities towards Iran,
pan-Arabism, the Great Lebanese Experiment, Christianity both in the region and
in general, and Russia, are most emphatically not "Western
interests". Those who hold such attitudes are most emphatically not
"us".
The Israeli Defence Force is now bombing Syria.
In support, necessarily, of the Islamist insurrection in that country. An
insurrection at once assisted and incited by the invading forces of Wahhabi
Saudi Arabia and Wahhabi Qatar. And by the invading forces of Islamist, NATO,
putatively EU Turkey.
One of the most pernicious lies in all of geopolitics
is that Israel is any sort of bulwark against Islamism. In point of fact, be
born into certain ethnic minorities within Israel’s 1948 borders, and you are
automatically subject to Sharia law. Far more people ought to know that than
do. Waving his Menorah passport and with the name of that State in the name of
his organisation, Raed Salah obviously knows it very well indeed.
Israel’s Sharia courts are those of the State of
Israel. Their rulings in relation to those born under their jurisdiction are the
law of the land, and their judges are appointed and paid by that State. By
contrast, although Israel treats family law rulings by
entirely private Christian religious courts as a fait accompli, that is
as far as any relationship goes. No wonder that Salah is such a proud and happy
Israeli.
He is not the only one. He was previously the
Mayor of Umm al-Fahm, a 100 per cent Arab and 99.7 per cent Muslim city which
has been run by his Islamic Movement for many years and where 83 per cent of
the population recently voted against transfer to Palestinian jurisdiction. If
you want to be the Islamic Movement’s fiefdom, then Israel will let you be it,
and will even pay your bills.
The Knesset includes Ibrahim Sarsur, who
campaigns for Jerusalem to be made the capital of the Caliphate. His oath of
office, an explicit pledge of allegiance to the State of Israel, clearly does
not preclude the furtherance of that objective, which is inconceivable on the
part of any member of a British, French, Dutch or other Parliament in Europe
even now where
either Jerusalem, or his or her own capital, was concerned.
But then, look at the governing coalition in
Israel. If any other country had a government members of which wished to
denaturalise both the ancient indigenous Christians and the ultra-Orthodox
Jews, while others around the Cabinet table held that every ethnic group apart
from their own had been created as beasts of burden, then that country would
rightly be treated as a pariah.
The insurrectionists within, and the invaders
from without, Syria at present merely aspire to purge the place of, among but
first among other people, the ancient indigenous Christians, the founders and
stalwarts of Arabism.
Whereas the State of Israel was founded on the
bloody mass expulsion of the ancient indigenous Christians, the founders and
stalwarts of Arabism in general and of the modern concept of Filastin in
particular, as long ago as 1948, after the British had been bombed out by the
inventors of modern terrorism, to whose victims no memorial is suffered to
exist anywhere on earth.
And the NATO, putatively EU Republic of Turkey
was founded as long ago as 1923 on the bloody mass expulsion of not one but two ancient indigenous
Christian peoples, one a section of the people that founded Western
civilisation and the other a section of the first entire people ever to embrace
the Gospel. The only two political forces of any
importance there are that historically dominant secular ultranationalism, and
the presently dominant Islamism.
Very much like the two forces represented in the
Government of Israel. Like anyone else, they know their own.
Brilliant piece, particularly on the history of Turkey or Israel.
ReplyDeleteAs for neoconservatism being a busted flush, it depends what you mean by neoconservatism.
The thing was only ever a re-branding exercise to bring the Left on board with the US/Israeli imperialist agenda.
They didn't realise that might mean the Right waking up to its own anti-war traditions, as is finally happening in the US.
Kerry and Obama the left-wing hawks vs the Tea Party anti-war doves.
Its how it was always meant to be.
But it's not how it is. Just wait for the GOP Presidential nomination process. They'll find someone. Anyone.
ReplyDeleteYou are very kind, however.
Oh, it certainly is. Even Noam Chomsky has now noticed that the best hope for the anti-war movement comes from the Right.
ReplyDeleteThen again, Chomsky famously called Ronald Reagan a "radical statist " (he's absolutely right) and pointed out the Republicans spend more public money on entitlements than the Democrats. It's statistically true.
Most people who think they know the history of the Right ( in America and here) actually know nothing about it.
The anti-war movement is reawakening in its natural home.
Under Obama, Kerry and Hagel the Franklin Roosevelt Party is returning to its big-government, pro- war roots.
I knew it wouldn't take long for the world to realign itself.
My respect for Chomsky increases every day.
The GOP is not going to nominate someone like that. It is not going to happen.
ReplyDeleteThe GOP will eventually have to listen to its grassroots or it will die.
ReplyDeleteIt is already trying to pander to the Tea Party-whose candidates were vociferously opposed to Obama's beloved Syria war.
All that I advise them to do, is to read Robert Nisbett ot Murray Rothbard's great "The Betrayal of the American Right", or indeed anything by Noam Chomsky.
Then they'll understand the rich Right-wing anti-war tradition they are drawing upon.
But they won't.
ReplyDelete