By Gilad Atzmon29 April 2011
Readers following the progress of the Libyan uprising will have noticed that self-proclaimed “philosopher” Bernard-Henri Lévy claims to support the struggle of the Libyan people against the Gaddafi mafia.
But, as Gilad Atzmon demonstrates, the Frenchman is in fact a hypocrite and an apologist for Israeli racism and the suppression of Palestinian human rights.
What makes one a philosopher?
Probably, the capacity to aim at the essence of things, while celebrating the love of wisdom (philo-sophos).
Although Bernard-Henri Lévy presents himself as a French philosopher, he seems to lack that elementary capacity. Unlike a true philosopher, Levy engages in an endless spin, typical of a hasbara – Israeli propaganda – agent.
On 2 February the Huffington Post gave a platform to the so-called “philosopher” Levy.
Levy doesn’t approve of the Boycott, Disinventment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel. He claims that the campaign is “anti-democratic”.
Levy the Israeli propagandist
I would have expected Levy eloquently to advocate freedom of speech and human rights, but the Zionist “intellectual” failed miserably. Levy followed the well-trodden Judaeo-centric Zionist template and spouted half-baked ideas that hardly form an argument. Pathetically, Levy’s ranting is mostly counter-productive to his own cause.
“First of all” he said, “one boycotts totalitarian regimes, not democracies... One can boycott Sudan, guilty of the extermination of part of the population of Darfur. One can boycott China, guilty of massive violations of human rights in Tibet and elsewhere. “
Bernard-Henri Lévy, Israeli propagandist
For some bizarre reason, Levy seems to be convinced that his beloved Jews-only state is an “exemplary democracy”. He says: “One does not boycott the only society in the Middle East where Arabs read a free press, demonstrate when they wish to do so, send freely-elected representatives to parliament and enjoy their rights as citizens.”
I guess that Levy either doesn’t know or pretends not to know that in the “Jews-only democracy” laws are racially orientated. The Law of Return, for instance, favours Jews and Jews only.
But it actually goes much further.
Levy’s argument is totally flawed and counterproductive to his Zionist cause. It is actually democracies, rather than dictatorships, that should be subjected to humanitarian boycotts because in democracies the people are complicit in their governments’ crimes.
We must boycott Israel because in the Jewish state every citizen is culpable in the war crimes committed by the democratically-elected government. We must boycott Israel because 94 per cent of its Jewish population supported the Israeli armed forces’ genocidal tactics during Operation Cast Lead against the people of Gaza. We must boycott Israel because its state-terror policies are a reflection of the public’s true will as proven in opinion polls and democratic elections.
According to Levy, in a democracy the voters have the power to sanction, modify and reverse the position of their government. It would be fabulous if Levy could enlighten us and suggest how exactly the Jews-only democracy is progressing towards an acceptance of universal rights for all.
As with all hasbara agents, Levy is outraged by the attempt to delegitimize Israel, yet, the philosopher in him fails to tell us what is exactly so wrong in delegitimizing a racially-driven, murderous collective. I also wonder what is so unacceptable about delegitimizing a state that was illegitimate to start with.
Levy doesn’t approve of the “one-state” enthusiasts. He far prefers to divide the land into two states. Someone had better remind this lame mind that Israel is currently one state that is located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Those who support one state are actually far from being radical. They have their feet on the ground. They accept Israel as one state, with one international dialling code, one power grid and one sewage system.However, the supporters of one state also realize that one-state Israel is dominated by Jewish Talmudic racism that is far more vicious than Nazi ideology. Proponents of the one state also realize that by the time Jewish racist ideology is defeated this one state between the river and the sea will become Palestine.
Levy is furious with one-state advocate Ali Abunimah, co-founder of Electronic Intifada, who, according to him, “does not hesitate to compare Israel to Nazi Germany”. It would be a little bit more useful if “philosopher” Levy is kind enough to suggest to us once and for all what is so wrong with comparing the Jews-only state with the Aryans-only state also known as Nazi Germany.
Towards the end of his Huffington Post article, Levy comes up with something that could almost pass for an argument. For Levy, the Western world should have hoped to be “cured of its worst criminal past”. It would be helpful and productive if Levy and other Zionists grasp that it is actually the West’s problematic past that shapes our criticism of the murderous Israeli present. It is our troubled past that makes us into enemies of racist Israel.
I was looking forward to read a Zionist “thinker” advocating for Israel. Levy obviously failed.
However, I admit that, as with Levy, I also have reservations regarding the BDS movement.
For instance, I believe that if the demand to boycott Israeli academics is valid, then we should also boycott academics and intellectuals who advocate Israeli policies and Zionism worldwide, because Israel is racist to the bone and racism must be opposed. If the BDS movement is taking itself seriously, then it should also demand the boycott Levy, Alan Dershowitz, David Hirsh and many others.
On the one hand, this would underline the BDS movement’s integrity. But as an advocate of freedom of speech, I actually want Dershowitz, Hirsh and Levy to speak their minds. I believe that together with Mark Regev, they are the best promoters of Zionist tribal morbidity.
Uprooted Palestinian