Just two years after its last national election cycle, Israel is once again headed to the polls in March. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s stated reason for firing Finance Minister Yair Lapid and Justice Minister Tzipi Livni in early December – thereby triggering the dissolution of the 19th Knesset – was growing differences of opinion between himself and the two key coalition members.

Netanyahu’s chief disagreement with Lapid and Livni was over his proposed “Jewish Nation-State Law.” Under this quasi-constitutional law, the group rights of the majority population are officially enshrined as superior to the individual rights of the minority. While Lapid and Livni have not expressed opposition to the spirit of the bill, they oppose some of its wording.

The two lawmakers are reluctant to support the bill because it makes privileges for Jews and discrimination against non-Jews explicit in the country’s legal code. To be clear, they do not oppose doling out privileges to Jews and withholding them from others. Rather, they want this to occur with less fanfare and more subtlety. In its current form, the bill would make it much more difficult for Livni and Lapid to defend Israel from accusations of apartheid in international fora.

As quoted by Haaretz, days before his dismissal, Lapid said “Yesh Atid [Lapid’s party] and I are for a nation-state bill, just not this nation-state bill.” In fact, it was Livni’s then-parliamentary camp, Kadima, that conceived the law in its first incarnation, back in 2011. The bill was originally introduced by a legislator working under Livni.

It is unclear whether the composition of the next Knesset will allow for easier passage of Netanyahu’s Jewish Nation-State Law. Regardless, however, Israel’s current de facto status as a “Jewish State” will continue to negatively impact the daily lives of all Arabs, Africans, Asians and other non-Jews living in Israel. Meanwhile, Israel’s defenders in the Knesset and U.S. Congress will continue to insist that its designation as a “Jewish State” is the most natural thing in the world.

But is it? Is there anything normal or natural about granting rights or giving special concessions to a subset of citizens, based on their ethnic origin or religious affiliation? If this question was asked about any democratic country in the world, other than Israel, the answer would be a resounding no. And yet, the mainstream media fails to expose this basic logical fallacy, while American lawmakers who invoke Israel’s status as a “Jewish State” are never pushed to explain this inconsistency.

Among the few who will acknowledge and emphasize this contradiction are those who wish to see Israel’s explicitly race-based social, legal, and political system instituted in the United States. In an interview I conducted in March 2014 at his home near Washington, D.C., Jared Taylor, a prominent proponent of a White United States of America, stressed this point:

American president after president… talks about the importance of maintaining a Jewish state of Israel. And yet, they don’t seem to have the slightest notion that… the population policies of Israel, are in complete contradiction with the ones that they proclaim for the United States. As I recall, [former Israeli Prime Minister] Yitzhak Rabin, not too long before he was assassinated, he said that he had done many things that he thought were good for Israel, but what he cared about most was that Israel remained at least 80% Jewish… People take this absolutely at face value, they see absolutely nothing wrong with this. But if an American politician were to say, ‘What I care about most in my policies is to maintain a United States that is at least 80% white,’ that would be considered hate mongering. That would be considered Nazism. And yet, frankly, I don’t see the difference.

Interview with Jared Taylor

On a personal level, I am adamantly opposed to racism of all kinds. I have spent the last several years reporting on the plight of African asylum-seekers in Israel and the government’s efforts to drive them out of the country because they are non-white and non-Jewish. I did not share any of Taylor’s beliefs before we sat down to speak [a fact he acknowledged before we began the interview], nor was I convinced by any of the arguments he made over the course of our conversation.

Nevertheless, when Taylor compares White Nationalism to Jewish Nationalism, he lays bare the duplicity of so-called liberal leaders on both sides of the Atlantic. Taylor would prefer this hypocrisy be resolved by embracing White Nationalism, while I would prefer Jewish Nationalism’s rejection.

Either way, the question stands: if America and Israel have “shared values,” as their elected leaders often claim, then how can so many Americans reject ethnocracy in their own country, but support what is happening inside Israel?

Read more like this in Muftah's Weekend Reads newsletter.

Advertisement Advertise on Muftah.

  • Capt. Bryant

    I met Mr. Jared Taylor last year heard his speech and have to say I am truly impressed by him. Very intelligent man and will one day (hopefully in his and my lifetime) be recognized for his thoughts and beliefs.

  • Josh

    ” nor was I convinced by any of the arguments he made over the course of our conversation.”

    He’s definitely right about one thing : the low IQ of black people. This scientifically undeniable fact alone is sufficient for his general worldview of white people keeping their societies apart from blacks. But there are probably other genetic quirks about white people that would make even high IQ Asians incompatible with Western Civilization.

  • Exactly.

  • Horace Gunn

    America’s founders made it quite clear that America was founded by Whites for Whites. Europeans came to America and they fought the Indians. The White settlers here did not submit to the Indians’ atrocities against their women and children. And they did not surrender when they realized that some of the Indians were friendly — that not every Indian got off on kidnapping White settlers and torturing them to death. They didn’t quit when it dawned on them that they would have a hard fight ahead to civilize North America. They fought and civilized the continent, building a country where we today now could live and work, where we could go to school and raise our families in a decent and safe environment: no Black gangs, no Asian gangs, no Hispanic gangs, no drugs, no drive-by shootings, no flood of non-Whites pouring into the country, no George Bushs’ Bill Clintons’ or Barak Obamas’ in the White House. It was a country of European Americans who fought for it, and built it.

  • Horace Gunn

    So in other words, just because Israel is some kind of exception no country, non-white included, should work to maintain or protect its majority population? (Tell that to the Chinese) Is that the standard now? Do you actually believe the new Afro-Chicano Spanish-speaking majority will give Whites the same legal protections, racial preferences and subsidies that Hispanics and blacks receive today? There are so many straw men, and so much PC nonsense in your thoughts here it would fill a typical university textbook.

  • CM732

    You are a horrible person. Why should Jews be allowed to have a state and Europeans should be denied one. Hypocrite.

  • CM732

    You are just another hypocrite Bryan.

  • Arron Frazier

    Your words are revisionist as typical of a white supremacist. Whites invaded these lands.and declared war on the indigenous people or who where already living here. Then whites set up a government and laws on stealing and etc. The important part about the word civilization is civil. Whites have never been civil where they gone among other people on this planet. Their goal is to rule and control everything at any cost even if it means destroying everything. The declaring war on people invading them and etc is not civil. Its evil barbarous totalitarian and should be called as such. However with the white mindset and world view your not suppose resist or fight against this aggression of evil. Your suppose to accept it.

  • DeShawn Allen Hunter

    >Your words are revisionist as typical of a white supremacist.


    >The original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were free white persons of good character. It thus excluded American Indians, indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and Asians.

    >The important part about the word civilization is civil.

    So we can agree that violent, abusive and illiterate Somali society (see: any memoir by Ayaan Hirsi-Ali that mentions her childhood) cannot be considered “civilization.”

    >Whites have never been civil where they gone among other people on this planet.

    Including the Finns and Irish? Whom did they ever colonize or enslave? South Korea and Finland were colonized even more recently than sub-Saharan Africa was, and they became First World countries in half a century.

    Does what Columbus did to the Taino justify ruining modern-day Sweden with immigrants who think a woman who walks about with her blond hair uncovered deserves to be assaulted?

  • That you use “atrocities” to describe how the indigenous Americans resisted, that you use the word “civilized” to describe the genocide of countless nations and peoples, reveals how bereft of humanity you are.

  • white nationalism is motivated by fear afterall. thank you for clearing that up.

  • Horace Gunn

    It is inhumane to flood White countries and ONLY White countries with Third World parasites.

    The only thing that’s revealed here is your emotional squishiness which is bereft of anything worth thinking about.

  • Horace Gunn

    Of course you will notice no one can counter your post, grounded in reality as it is.

  • Horace Gunn

    Which is to say egalitarian propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards such as yourself an excuse not to think at all.

  • Horace Gunn

    Very narrow of you. Lemmings like you do not make up their minds independently. They are psychologically incapable of doing that. Instead, they look around and try to understand what other people are thinking: their peers and their authority figures. And then that’s what THEY think. And then you have the balls to condemn anyone that doesn’t believe like they do.

  • Tylenol Jones

    I see no reason why the United States should give up its white majority to Hispanics just as I see no reason why Israel should open its borders to African and Arab refugees. Why should such promoting racial homogeneity entail fear; and even if it did what’s wrong with that? Both Hispanics (primarily Mexicans) and Arabs (primarily Palestinians) have historical grievances, both real and perceived against the United States and Israel, respectively. Is it not fair to presume that if either group were to become a racial majority that they would promote their racial interests legislatively and in all likelihood to the detriment of the eclipsed majority?

  • Horace Gunn

    So lets get this straight: If the US was to adopt Israels’ immigration policy, which is to maintain an identity and demographic, would that be considered motivated by fear? What a tool….

  • Horace Gunn

    We came to America and we fought the Indians. The White settlers here did not submit to the Indians’ atrocities against our women and children. And we did not throw up our hands and surrender when we realized that some of the Indians were friendly — that not every Indian was in the habit of kidnapping White settlers and torturing them to death in horrible ways. We didn’t quit when it dawned on us that we would have a hard fight ahead of us to civilize North America. We fought! We civilized the continent. We built a country where we could live and work, where we could go to school and raise our families in a decent and safe environment: no Black gangs, no Asian gangs, no Hispanic gangs, no drugs, no drive-by shootings, no flood of non-Whites pouring into the country, no Obama in the White House. It was our America. We fought for it, and we built it. Choke on it.