Israel Third, To Be Precise

The wrongness of the appellation “Israel Firster” is the point of the appellation, thus the predictable development and devolution of a discussion – in the works of one damn blogger, blogging reporter, reporting blogger after another after another – that rises to the level of dialogue only where it breaks down completely, as what cannot be achieved by logic is instead achieved by the failure of logic, by the violent impact, the harm inflicted by whomever on whomsoever else and on themselves. The participants in this discussion will, because they must, continually and compulsively, inevitably and inescapably, underestimate the degree to which their own contradictory and incomplete self-identities have always already distorted and compromised their positions.Their necessary resort to rhetorical violence mimics and re-produces, but also precedes, pre-figures, the resort by real actors to physical violence.  Pursuing a conversation supposedly about contested identities – national, political, religious or spiritual or eternal, historical, collective, individual all at once – performing own identity as contestation of the other’s, they search for the sum but repeat the same.  Or:  They search for the dispositively undeniable sum, the identity of identities, pure self-identity – the plain truth, the fair description, the bottom line – but what they find, ever, is refraction of the failure with which they began, as they likely even have been warned they would, some time before choosing to go on anyway as though for some good reason. As a substitute for the discussion that never actually commences, we receive a disorganized catalog of factoidal assertions built on unexamined assumptions, a collective stammering of fragmentary mantras, until both sides half-collapse from fatigue, and drag themselves, along with their new or re-opened wounds, from the anti-orgy, each and all half-convinced of half-victory, half self-assured that the other half halfway at least knows and feels deep down that he/she/they/it lost… then begin again the search for that plain fair true real falsehood. No one, least of all your half-Jew half-host more than half expects anyone actually to understand even halfway.  No one discussing the notion of “Israel First,” as no one once upon a time discussing the mirror notion of “America First,” can fully comprehend the paradox embedded in the concept except materially, except in the actualization of their  ignorance – their, your, my, our ignorance – via politics.

(Illustration: George Washington Crucified © Stephen Alcorn; Casein on poplar panel; 26″ x 20″; http://www.alcorngallery. com)

15 comments on “Israel Third, To Be Precise

Commenting at CK MacLeod's

We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.

  1. that was one well-polished little bijou.

    lit up my little green kisser.

    You’re an Anti-National Treasure, Your Very Highness,

    small only tiny hardly-even perhaps a correction…….

    Is it “Israel Firster” that they’re calling me sometimes,

    I thought that they thought that papa Fuster yclept me as Israel ?

  2. just a bad joke offered on account I just d’other day got into an argument with someone and taunted him a second time after he twice failed to manage to define the term.

    there’s was nothing in your perfect pearl that was not first-water.

    positively hydroponic.

    • aw pshaw, was plagiarizing from myself and slugging the malfunctioning radio cuz don’t have time to write a postier post collecting, sorting, re- and de-constructing the Israel First kerfuffle in detail. While was proofing and thinking about a possible title, the words “George Washington crucified” popped into my head, I’m not sure why, so Googled ’em, and hit that I think totally terrific painting, which I’m using even though its connections may seem even obscurer than everything else.

  3. One wishing that Israel had the discretion, to comtemplate their navels like that, but having 1/2 of their ancestors liquidated, by a World at best indifferent, doesn’t give them that luxury.

    • Don Miguel: Read closely: “Nation” means birth-place – land of the fellow-born (intimately tied to the the word “race” as well, of common descent, see also “root”) – “nativity,” “nascent,” “nation,” “navel.” Contemplation of the navel of the modern state of Israel must lead backward to the Holocaust. The founding of the eventual state of Israel and the destruction of half of “Israel” – which before the state of Israel was the name for the people without a land, the nation without a territory – can be seen as (though not entirely reduced to) two phases of the same gestation.

      Now, if the “world” had been indifferent, there would have been no liquidation. (“Liquidation”a very odd term in this context, but we can let that pass.) The problem of indifference seemed to be God’s. This opens up a complex and soul-endangering exercise.

  4. Like the visual art of it, CK. The font is just right and the look is just right. No surprise. Didn’t I once try to point out what a great visual artist you are, especially for a philosopher? Didn’t go so well if I recall correctly.

    • The painting struck me as a very Scott subject. When I first knew you, you would have done it in acrylic, but probably more like one or another Old Master with some suggestion of a self-portrait, or maybe Danielle and Pam in the Native roles. Whereas Jim would have done it in 3-D as a composite of pre-existing paintings. Nowadays of course you’d do it more like a scary Cubist graffiti woodcut.

Commenter Ignore Button by CK's Plug-Ins

Leave a Reply to CK MacLeod Cancel reply

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