Itamar Ben-Gvir is a “white supremacist” according to a prominent ‘pro-Palestinian’ Canadian commentator. Despite Israel’s endless horrors, Mathew Behrens will twist himself into knots to obfuscate the supremacist character of that state.
Below a photo of the Israeli national security minister Behrens recently noted, “I think he serves as a useful tool for the white supremacist Israeli apartheid regime.”
Of course, it makes sense for the long-time activist to describe him that way since Ben-Gvir leads a party called white power (not), which emerged from a party called the white national front (not). He’s also a disciple of someone who led the White Defence League (not) and Ben-Gvir worked for an organization defending white extremists (not) accused of violence. As minister in a self-described white state (not), he’s now seeking to have whites (not) from around the world take over important mosques and colonize more Palestinian land.
Outside a fantasy land concocted by Behrens to protect a genocidal supremacist movement, Ben-Gvir’s party is called “Jewish Power”. It emerged from the Jewish National Front and Ben-Gvir is a disciple of Meir Kahane, a rabbi who led the violent Jewish Defense League. Ben-Gvir previously worked for a group that assisted violent Jewish extremists, is seeking to have Jews take over the Al Aqsa Mosque and wants Jewish colonizers to steal more Palestinian land.
It’s funny to think of the cognitive dissonance that would take place if Behrens and Ben-Gvir had a conversation. The ‘pro-Palestinian’ Canadian activist would tell the minister of a self-described Jewish state that he’s a “white supremacist” because the British empire played a central role in the Zionist movement a century ago and Washington provides important support today. As he repositioned his large Kippah, Ben-Gvir would respond that his family’s roots are in Iraq and his party does particularly well with Mizrahi (Arab) Jews. He would say he has no problem with the extremist who recently got off after being filmed beating a French nun in East Jerusalem because he believes in a Jewish homeland. Ben-Gvir would tell Behrens that he doesn’t believe Jews should marry non-Jews and that he doesn’t like Mathew’s views, but he has the right to immigrate to Israel tomorrow.
If so many Palestinian, Lebanese and other lives weren’t impacted, it would be funny hearing the dissonance between Ben-Gvir’s ‘ethnically cleanse the Palestinians supremacist honesty’ and Behrens’ ‘pro-Palestinian deny Israel’s Jewish supremacist character’ spin.
Behrens’ isn’t just a passive bigot. He is consciously protecting a supremacist ideology/system from challenge. Behrens posts articles arguing that “Framing Zionism as Jewish and not white supremacy is a dangerous proposition” and labels as antisemitic those employing the term “Jewish supremacy” (including former Israeli army chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon in today’s New York Times). He’s fully aware that Israel has dozens of laws that give special privileges to Jews. Behrens knows that nearly a decade ago Israel adopted an openly discriminatory “Nation-State of the Jewish People” law. He knows the Jewish National Fund has pursued racist land use policies for a century and that five years ago B’Tselem published “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid.”
Yet he denies that Israel is a Jewish supremacist state. It doesn’t matter how many Palestinians, Lebanese, Iranians and others are killed, Behrens prioritizes the impact that (honest) language might have on Jewish Canadians. This protective framing, which remains dominant on much of the left, leads people away from directly challenging the hundreds of self-identified Jewish organizations in Canada that actively promote genocide and apartheid. Yet opponents of Israel’s horrors desperately need to politically isolate and defund (at least remove grants and subsidies through charitable status) the many Jewish organizations supporting Israel’s endless crimes.
At a broader ideological level, as my father Gary Engler explained in “The Case for Using ‘Jewish Supremacy’ to Describe Zionism”, employing the language of racial supremacism “puts Israel supporters on the back foot. Naming Jewish supremacism is more politically biting. This is especially important when supporters of Israeli apartheid and genocide often seek to present themselves as victims.” By naming Jewish supremacy we are also neutering a principle ideological stick of Zionism: the weaponization of ‘antisemitism’.
Leftists must reject Mathew Behrens’ dishonesty. It’s past time to call out this form of Jewish supremacism.
Support Yves’ work. Donate Now.
