Supporters of Israel refer to it as “the Jewish state.”
Critics rarely use that term. Some even argue “It is not a Jewish state.”
The reaason is, these critics are intimidated by the word ‘antisemitism.’ While the left overuses the allegation ‘racism,’ the right cries ‘antisemitism,’ to smear opponents of Israel’s crimes. On 7/10/23, the right adopted a far more comprehensive ‘cancel culture’ than the one they oppose.
When asked why the USA gives unconditional support to Israel, both right and left mostly argue Israel is America’s ally. The right think this is a good thing; the left tends to argue that it is an expression of European colonialism, or a tool of US imperialism. Over and again, one finds leftists on social media labeling Israel ‘white supremacy.’ Apartheid South Africa was an implementation of white supremacy. Israel? White supremacy! The intellectual gymnastics the left performs to avoid the J-word could win Olympic medals.
Almost twenty years ago, Michael Neumann savaged the tactical ineptitude of left-wing anti-Zionists, claiming they put feelings before facts: “What’s the welfare of the Palestinians compared to the left’s emotional commitment to anti-imperialism?”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/18/the-palestinians-and-the-party-line
If Israel is a tool of the US, it follows that patriotic Americans should support Israel. It is both more accurate and more effective to argue that Israel’s relationship to the US is parasitic. Perhaps some on the left are worried that arguing it is unpatriotic to support Israel could lead patriots into… white supremacy. As if that remote possibility is worth considering, in the context of the daily genocide being carried out, not by Nazis or the KKK, but by the Jewish state.
Others argue that the USA supports Israel, even when Israel’s interests are at variance with its own, because US politicians are selected for their eagerness to serve the interests of Jews. The most obvious example of this selection process is the millions of dollars the Jewish organisation AIPAC donates to the campaigns of pro-Israel candidates.
I believe that it’s impossible to resolve this issue by accumulating evidence for one side or the other. For example, the fact that Israel attacks countries which are not US-aligned doesn’t show that it’s doing it on behalf of America, as Caitlin Johnstone believes. It could just as well be that these countries are not US-aligned because the USA supports Israel.
The evidence doesn’t tell us whether the groveling of US politicians toward their Israeli counterparts is a reflection of Jewish power in the USA, or whether they’re just pretending, in order to cover up for the role of Israel in acting for American hegemony in the oil-rich geostrategic blah-blah-blah.
The reason I favour the ‘Jewish power’ explanation of the competition among politicians for who can genuflect to Israel and its supporters most fervently, is that it’s the most parsimonious description of the data.
Mearsheimer and Walt, in their book The Israel Lobby, ask the right question:
– US presidents mildly criticize Israeli policies
– Israeli politicians express open contempt for the supposedly most powerful man in the world, bragging of how ‘The Jewish Lobby’ (their words) will bring this uppity goy into line
– And so it comes to pass…
is this all
1. an elaborate charade to make it look as if the Lobby can determine US policy regarding Israel in order to cover up for US hegemony, by diverting attention to the Jews, or
2. is the most elegant/economical/likely explanation that Jewish power trumps US interests?
Let’s make it simple. Given all the examples of US politicians groveling to Israel, is this a facade to disguise the fact that Israel is really subordinate to the US empire, or is the most parsimonious explanation, that Israel really does tell US politicians what to do?
Since 7/10/23, it has been difficult to keep track of the examples of politicians falling over each other to compete in groveling to the Jewish state and its supporters. To take one example, the Antisemitism Awareness Act passed 320 to 91 in the House of Representatives, though it clearly violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution. For example, it proposes to penalise
“denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
(An aside: Caitlin Johnstone, bless her, is a committed critic of Israel. She would argue that claiming Israel is racist does not deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination: https://x.com/caitoz/status/1806497727272071622?t=7DOueWdBMkLCwu8FYNHvNA&s=19. I would rather say I don’t care if it does deny them that right.)
Witness the rabid attacks on academic freedom, with politicians regularly claiming that university protests against genocide are comparable to the genesis of the Nazi party.
It is far more parsimonious to describe the groveling as a result of Jewish power, than to describe it as a facade to make it look like a result of Jewish power.
One reason the Palestine solidarity movement has been so spectacularly unsuccessful, contrasted to the anti-apartheid campaign, is that it doesn’t point to the cause of the problem it is trying to solve: the power of Jews in Western institutions, media, and culture, particularly in the USA. Jewish power is difficult to oppose because of the power of Jews. Part of this power is our fear of repeating what happened when Jews were singled out in the past.
But until we point to the real cause of the West’s support for genocide, we are at best wasting our time.
the jay report 
I reflexively wince against using the term Jewish to describe israel, I’m not sure if it’s the leftist in me, but a lot of what you say is true. I dunno, it’s lien 1+1= banana to me.