AnarchoBolshevik

joined 5 years ago
MODERATOR OF
 

Nearly 60,000 Israelis left the country last year and didn’t return — more than twice the number in 2023. A full 81 percent were young people and families, often between 25 and 44 years old, the statistics bureau says. And the company Ci Marketing found that around 40 percent of Israelis still here are considering leaving.

Reasons for these figures might seem obvious: the war, the government’s attempt to weaken the judiciary, the rising cost of living. The children’s future might be better elsewhere.

But what about the reasons to stay? Four Israelis have told Haaretz why they’re thinking of leaving, and why — at least for now — they’re staying.

Riky Cohen, 56, is a writer, poet and editor who lives in Tel Aviv and has been thinking about emigrating for a decade. “Every time I hear that someone is leaving I throw a tantrum,” she says.

Cohen is in a relationship and the mother of two: a 23-year-old son in the career army and an 18-year-old daughter doing a year of national service before the army. For a few years, Cohen’s partner totally rejected the idea of leaving.

“He even objected to me getting a Portuguese passport, when it was possible. Today he regrets it,” Cohen says.

The frequency and durability of these thoughts gradually increased, and for two years “we’ve had heated arguments about it,” she says. Her partner feared they might not find work abroad, and their children are rooted here. And they didn’t want to leave without them.

Cohen is looking abroad because she’s pessimistic about Israel’s future in terms of security, politics and economics. She’s also wistful about a “normal” life, “without worrying all the time about what’s happening in a disintegrating country, in a dystopia.”

But not only her partner has reasons to stay. “Hebrew is my first anchor in the world,” Cohen says, adding that “when you leave, you lose your network. I’d be happy to leave with a group.”

Antisemitism doesn’t scare her; “they make more out of it than it is,” she says. And for her, life is scarier here; after all, she lives in a house with no safe room. “During the sirens I worried that a wall might fall on me, and for months after October 7, I had nightmares about terrorists,” she says.

In the meantime, Cohen is trying to convince her children to emigrate after the army. “I ask them what needs to happen for them to no longer be able to bear life here, in the hope that if this comes, it will still be possible to leave,” she says. “I think we might have missed the opportunity.”

She fears that Israel will become a dictatorship, “and one way or another, what’s happening now will bring down on us something similar to annihilation.”

As Cohen puts it, “We’re in a disaster. I’ve asked myself many times what I would have done in the Holocaust — join the partisans and fight, or try to flee and be saved. Now I’m wavering between the question of whether to fight to the end to try to save this place — and what the price could be — or flee.”

Despite the many reasons to leave, Cohen concludes the interview with a quote from a 2011 poem by Eli Eliahu, “City and Fears”: “A person must leave signs of struggle behind.”

“I hope we will fight, despite everything,” she says.

Feeling unwanted

Another interviewee requested anonymity, so I’ll call her Shira. She’s 41 and lives in the center of the country. For her, too, thoughts about emigrating are nothing new.

“I’ve thought about it forever, but since the war began it’s grown stronger, and it’s become more socially acceptable to talk about,” she says.

Shira, who’s a graphic designer and single, says a lot of her friends have left. For her, the reason is a feeling that Israel has no future politically. “As long as we insist on ‘Jewish and democratic,’ and as long as there’s an occupation, there won’t be a true democracy,” she says.

Emigration isn’t an abstract idea for Shira. Her family lived for a few years in the United States when she was a child. “I realize that it’s possible to live differently, but because I’ve experienced emigration, I know how hard it is,” she says.

Her English may be excellent, but “I don’t feel it’s home for me.” Plus she knows how a new place makes it hard to fit in. “I remember how hard it was for me when I was a girl, so what could I expect at 40 plus?”

Another reason concerns health. “I suffer from health problems, I’m supported by National Insurance, and I’m treated in the public [health] system,” she says. “I also have a support system of family and friends. To build it all up in a new place is very complicated.”

And how will she move her pets and belongings — and where to? “It’s not simple to decide; the United States is in a horrible state, and in the past, New York wasn’t so good to me,” she says.

All the same, Shira still believes that she’ll leave Israel. “I don’t know when or how, and maybe I’m deluding myself, but life here is becoming unbearable, and I’m feeling that my right to feel at home here is being stolen from me.”

The gap between mainstream views and Shira’s political opinions — especially since October 7 — has made her feel unwanted. She’s increasingly alienated from what Israeliness seems to represent.

She mentions the small talk in the dog park since October 7. One day, the women there were friendly to her, and then one asked, “In what way would it be better wipe out Gaza — starvation or a nuclear bomb?”

Shira asks: “How can it be that this is a normal conversation in the street, and I’m considered strange?”

When the house is burning, you stay

Israeli filmmaker Barak Heymann feels he’s living in a parallel Israeli universe. “We don’t breathe the same air,” he says.

He’s talking about right-wing voters, but also his own people who are protesting against the undermining of the judiciary and for a deal that brings all the hostages home. Alas, these kindred spirits are ignoring the suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

“This always makes me the party pooper. I’m with them in opposing the judicial coup, and I’m with the anger over the abandoning of the hostages, of course,” he says.

“But when I tell them that around 70 Palestinian prisoners have been killed in Israeli prison facilities since the beginning of the war, they doubt my sources. And when I write in my work WhatsApp group about the Gazan children who are being murdered by soldiers, I’m seen as an extremist and a depressing provocateur — as if I’m insensitive to the suffering of Israelis.”

Heymann has been off social media for a year now, after his picture and personal information were posted in far-right Telegram groups. But on WhatsApp he reads about the children being killed in Gaza.

“Most Jewish Israelis are living in a false reality of a Holocaust because of October 7, and I’m in a reality of a Holocaust because of Gaza and the West Bank, and that creates a very heavy and sad emotional disconnect,” he says.

Almost everything that happens looks different to him than it does to other people; for example, the recent letter by reservist fighter pilots. “This wording that we need to bring back the hostages ‘even at the price of ending the war’ — it’s as if to stop killing children is a price and not something desirable,” Heymann says.

His partner, Warsaw native Anna Kardaszewska, came to Israel in 2009 because of Heymann. Even though they always talked about living in Poland for a while, when the war broke out, Kardaszewska decided that it was time to leave, but Heymann realized he couldn’t join her.

For now, she and the children are in Poland, and Heymann visits every month. He says he can’t leave his job as head of the film school at Beit Berl College northeast of Tel Aviv.

“It’s unimaginable for me to tell my students: It’s hard here, so I’m going and deal with it yourselves,” he says. “When the house is going up in flames, my instinct is to stay, resist and pour water on it.”

His situation is “strange and complicated,” he says. “Politically, I prefer to fight fascists. In emotional terms, even though I’m disgusted by all the Israeli nationalism and I support those who boycott Israel, in the same breath I’m the most Israeli person in the world and see myself as a patriot.”

The alienation simply hasn’t been great enough to leave. “As part of my work, I travel around the world a lot, and there’s nowhere I enjoy more than here,” he says. “I’m connected to the mentality, to the weather, the people, the language, the food. I’m staying here not just for moral and political reasons, but for an egotistical reason, too.”

And Heymann is working on a Hebrew-language documentary about — of course — Israelis leaving the country. “It’s totally schizophrenic,” he says with a smile, adding that while he was spending time with people preparing to move abroad, his family was heading to Warsaw.

“I’ll need to make a decision about when to join them, because longing is the strongest emotion I’m having now,” he says. “But I hope that even if I join them, it will be for a limited time. The harder it gets here, the more I feel a desire and obligation to stay.”

A new bag of problems

Meital, a 38-year-old sustainability expert from Jerusalem, has also opted for a pseudonym. She says [that] she makes a decision every week, sometimes every day, on whether to stay in Israel. Meital, who is single, says [that] she has been asking herself this same question since the 2014 Gaza war.

“But recently the decision to stay has become harder and harder,” she says. “For the first time I realized I had a red line: If we lose in the next election I’ll leave, because I’ll finally realize that people like me don’t have a chance here.”

Meital also went through relocation as a child. When she was 11 her family moved to London for a few years, and as an adult she studied there for a master’s.

“I’m here out of choice,” she says. “When people talk about emigrating, I tell them it’s no picnic. Anyone who hasn’t experienced it doesn’t understand the depth of the loneliness.”

In many ways, life was better in England. “More money, more culture. Everything there was better, except for what really matters.”

She adds: “There’s also an element of what my grandmother would have said. I come from a family of kibbutzniks who built the country, passionate Zionists. To leave Israel forever, for us that’s like leaving religion.”

She adds: “There’s also an element of what my grandmother would have said. I come from a family of kibbutzniks who built the country, passionate Zionists. To leave Israel forever, for us that’s like leaving religion.”

Meital also doesn’t want to leave feeling that she’s escaping; she wants to be heading to something. “A lot of people complain that I have a foreign passport, so I’m all set,” she says.

“But the bureaucracy isn’t the main obstacle in migration. What’s hard is to leave your home.”

[–] AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 14 hours ago

For me, the biggest flaw in the two-state proposal is that it would fail to resolve the Herzlian ruling class’s lust for spazio vitale, and there would always remain a risk of the IOF waging a war against an independent Palestinian state. (Remember 1967.) So recognizing Palestine would mean very little if it also meant recognising its occupation.

The likeliest outcome is that the most privileged sections of the occupation are going to leave out of exhaustion and frustration (with maybe a few stragglers awaiting somebody’s wrath), then the least privileged foreigners—the houseless Jews, the communist Jews, the Jews who have nothing left to lose—they are going to accept the presence of returnees in their region and submit to a plurinational government.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps, but I am basing that on my observations of the neocolony. Look around… crime is worsening within the ethnostate. The number of people refusing the IOF is growing. Scores of thousands of settlers have quit the occupation. Wishful thinking would be peace happening immediately. Rather, the neocolony’s road to collapse is going to be long and painful, which it did not need to be, but nevertheless remains the likeliest outcome since the ruling class is dragging its feet.

 

Quoting Russ Bellant’s Old Nazis, the New Right, and the Republican Party: Domestic Fascist Networks and U.S. Cold War Politics, pages xvii–xviii:

It’s May 17, 1985: President Reagan has been back in the nation’s capital less than two weeks from his much-criticized trip to the Bitburg cemetery in Germany. Now, floodlights and television cameras that are part of a President’s entourage are waiting at the Shoreham Hotel, as are 400 luncheon guests.

Ronald Reagan had recently characterized the Nazi Waffen SS as "victims." It seemed a rewrite of the history of World War II rather than a recommitment to its painful lessons. Reagan’s comments held special meaning for some of his afternoon luncheon guests. Although it was a Republican Party affair, it was not the usual GOP set, but a special ethnic outreach unit, the National Republican Heritage Groups (Nationalities) Council (NRHG{N}C). The Republican Heritage Groups Council is an umbrella for various ethnic Republican clubs and operates under the auspices of the Republican National Committee.

If President Reagan needed a boost after the Bitburg fiasco, this was the crowd to supply it. To the assembled media, Reagan’s visit that afternoon appeared as a routine stop, perhaps paying a re-election debt. The Republican Heritage Groups Council did, in fact, help elect Reagan. And they gave him a long standing ovation that afternoon at the Shoreham. To some of those attending the 1985 Council meeting, Reagan’s rehabilitation of the Waffen SS must have offered a sense of personal and historic vindication.

The Republican Heritage Groups Council has a special type of outreach. It appears to have consciously recruited some of its members—and some of its leaders—from an Eastern European émigré network which includes anti­-Semites, racists, authoritarians, and fascists, including sympathizers and collaborators of [the] Third Reich, former [Axis personnel], and even possible war criminals. The persons in this network represent only a radical right fraction of the ethnic communities [that] they claim to represent.

These antidemocratic and racialist components of the Republican Heritage Groups Council use anticommunist sentiments as a cover for their views while they operate as a de facto émigré fascist network within the Republican Party. Some of these less savory antidemocratic personalities were part of the 1987 Republican Heritage Groups Council meeting as well as that 1985 luncheon audience; and some would later join the 1988 election campaign of George [H.W.] Bush.

Ronald Reagan said that it wasn’t what it looked like when he saluted those dead Axis soldiers, but as I am about to show you, we have plenty of reasons to suspect that he was lying about that, such as how he endorsed the so‐called ‘Captive Nations’, which was littered with neofascists and antisemites:

[I]n 1980, Ronald Reagan launched his successful presidential campaign at a Labor Day “ethnic festival” at Liberty State Park in Jersey City. According to Jersey City’s Ukrainian Weekly newspaper, “The majority of the more than 20 ethnic groups taking part in the festival were affiliated with the Captive Nations Committee of New York.” Ivan Dochev died in 2005, but on paper he remains an honorary president of the Captive Nations Committee of New York, which the AF–ABN established in the 1950s.

With a friend of the “captive nations” finally in the White House, the 25th annual Captive Nations Week was dedicated to the fake 40th anniversary of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, and ABN leader Yaroslav Stetsko got an invitation to Washington where he shook hands with President Reagan and Vice President Bush. According to Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party by Russ Bellant, the BNF-affiliated VOC trustee, Radi Slavoff, arranged Ivan Dochev’s 1984 visit to the White House as executive director of the Republican Heritage Groups Council, the GOP’s “special ethnic outreach unit.”

There was possibly some significant overlap between the Republican Heritage Groups Council and the now defunct World Anti-Communist League, of which Ronald Reagan was undeniably a member:

Members of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) — a right wing international cartel of sorts — include[d] such luminaries as Ferdinand Marcos, Rev. Sun Myung Moon, and Adolfo Calero, commander in chief of the armed forces of the FDN contras. The WACL’s roots [went] back to 1954 with the establishment of the Asian People’s Anti-Communist League. [In the 1980s,] the WACL [grew] to six regional organizations with affiliates in more than 90 countries.

One of the most important people in the WACL [was] retired U.S. Major General John Singlaub. Singlaub began his military and intelligence career as an OSS member during World War II. In 1976, he became Chief of Staff of both the United Nations and U.S. Army Forces in South Korea. He was removed in 1977 after he publicly criticized President Jimmy Carter’s withdrawal of troops from Korea.

Singlaub joined WACL in 1980 and formed an American chapter called the United States Council for World Freedom. Singlaub was elected president. Singlaub [gave] the WACL credibility in several ways:

  • President Reagan began calling the contras “freedom fighters” in 1983, a term the WACL and others on the far right have used for years.

  • When U.S. Congress temporarily cut off Nicaraguan contra funding in 1984, a group of various American conservative leaders raised $25 million in private “contributions.” Singlaub and the WACL were at the center of the campaign.

  • Several WACL members [had] been appointed as ambassadors to the Bahamas, Costa Rica, and Guatemala by Reagan.

Then, at the 17th Annual WACL Conference, held in San Diego, California, Singlaub read a letter which said in part, “The World Anti-Communist League has long played a leadership role in drawing attention to the gallant struggle now being waged by the true freedom fighters of our day. Nancy and I send our best wishes for every future success.” The letter was signed by Ronald Reagan.

The WACL [was] so extreme — according to Scott and Jon Lee Anderson who wrote INSIDE THE LEAGUE, an exposé of the WACL — that the John Birch Society […] shunned it and advise[d] its members to do likewise.

Geoffry Stewart-Smith, a staunch British anti-communist, left the WACL because it is “largely a collection of Nazis, fascists, anti-Semites, sellers of forgeries, vicious racialists and corrupt self-seekers. It has evolved into an anti-Semitic international […] the very existence of this organization is a total disgrace to the free world.”

Reagan knew what he meant when he said that the Abraham Lincoln Brigade fought on the ‘wrong side’ in the Spanish Civil War. While he might have been demented as early as the 1980s, it is absurdly unlikely that anybody would willingly associate with these types all by mistake.

Aside from these and a former HJ member whom he very briefly employed before firing for unrelated reasons, some of Reagan’s other associates included

J. Peter Grace — A scion of the Grace fortunes, he [was] head of Reagan’s commission to study domestic economic cuts.[56] For 30 years his company employed Otto Ambrose, [an Axis] war criminal from the German drug cartel I.G. Farben. Ambrose, a chemist, developed “Zyklon B,” the actual gas used in the chambers to kill the Jews and others deemed “inferior.”[57] The German steel group, Flick, which has extensive [Axis] ties in the past and whose scandals [were] rocking German politics [in the 1980s], hold a controlling stock interest in the Grace company.[58]

The Grace family is intimately involved with the formation of the anti-Communist American Institute for Free Labor Development (AIFLD).[59] AIFLD played a key rôle in the Kissinger plan to overthrow Allende in Chile, and insert the ruling [para]fascist Pinochet.[60] After the coup, which involved American Green Berets,[61] Kissinger sent a Mr. Rauff from the State Department to advise the newly formed Chilean secret police (DINA). Rauff had been in charge of the “mobile ovens” used to kill [Roma] and Jews, homosexuals and political dissidents in Eastern Europe for the [Third Reich].[62] These same forces were later involved in the assassination of Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier in Washington, D.C.[63]

Helene von Damm — Personal White House appointment secretary long-time personal secretary to Ronald Reagan, she stands to be appointed Ambassador to Vienna, and controls all cabinet level appointments in the Reagan administration.[64] She came to the United States in the 1950s in the company of Albrecht Otto von Bolschwing, and worked for him as a translator.[65] Von Bolschwing gave the direct orders to Adolph Eichmann in the dread[ed] Eisenstatz, group, the SS killers.[66] Helene’s husband, Christian von Damm, ran the Bank of America in La Paz, Bolivia, which defaulted on a huge U.S. loan.[67]

[Footnote](Reagan was also an acquaintance of Errol Flynn, whom Charles Higham infamously claimed had his own associations with Fascists, but this accusation seems to be based more on guesswork than evidence; it is only a rumor.)

The Reagan régime had no interest in pursuing Axis war criminals. Quoting Eric Lichtblau’s The Nazis Next Door: How America became a Safe Haven for Hitler’s Men, chapter 12:

Ignored for decades, [Axis officials] in America had suddenly become a political flash point by the time Ronald Reagan was in the White House, with anger fomenting on all sides. The vigilantes leaving bombs on the doorsteps of ex-Nazis were only part of the firestorm.

Many conservative Cold Warriors were furious, too, but for very different reasons. While the Jewish militants were angry that the American justice system hadn’t gone far enough to track down ex-Nazis, the conservatives were upset that it had gone too far, playing right into the hands of the Communists, they charged. Inside the gates of the White House, the conservative critics found a fierce ally in President Reagan’s own firebrand advisor, Pat Buchanan.

Buchanan, a former Nixon aide with a rapier tongue and a pugnacious personality, didn’t mask his disdain for what he called the “revenge-obsessed” and “hairy-chested Nazi hunters” at the Justice Department. He believed that the entire Nazi-hunting team should be abolished, and from his prominent perch in Washington—as a top aide to Reagan at the White House, in his nationally syndicated newspaper columns, and in his frequent cable-TV appearances—he launched what amounted to a one-man PR assault through the 1980s. The Justice Department had better things to do than “running down seventy-year-old camp guards,” Buchanan wrote, or “wallowing in the atrocities of a dead regime.”

(Emphasis added in most cases.)

Reagan’s last fifteen minutes of shame came out in 2019, when Timothy J. Naftali published a telephone conversation that Governor Reagan had with President Richard Nixon, in which Gov. Reagan ridiculed Africans. (Reagan supported presidential candidate Richard Nixon in the 1960s, and ex-president Nixon would return the favor in the 1980s.) A less well known example was when Gov. Reagan dismissed three Jewish chaplains, understandingly provoking accusations of antisemitism:

Governor Ronald Reagan’s dismissal of three Jewish chaplains, the entire complement ministering on a full time basis to patients of that faith in California’s 14 mental hospitals, is a “blatant act of anti-Semitism.” That was the statement today of Percy Moore, executive director of Oakland’s anti-poverty program and the president of the California Community Action Program Directors Association, a state-wide organization composed of anti-poverty leaders.

Moore, who is black, said that the elimination of all three Jewish chaplains, effective July 1, while some 33 Catholic and Protestant chaplains are retained for full-time work in the mental hospitals, is “nothing more than a blatant act of anti-Semitism that is right in line with other recent acts of the Governor that discriminate against the poor and the sick, and with special impact of those of the minority groups.”

Rabbi Harry Hyman agreed. Of course, given Reagan’s tokenization of Jews, and more importantly, his support for the occupation of Palestine, too many people were willing to forgive or forget this episode. Nevertheless, Reagan’s support was not for Jews in general, but Herzlians like the Hebrew fascist Zeʻev Vladimir Jabotinsky, whom he admired:

“Few are the leaders who in their own lifetime have become a legend. Zeʻev Vladimir Jabotinsky to whom you pay tribute was such a leader. He was a soldier, statesman and poet who believed in the sanctity of the individual. He was a visionary who dreamt of a free Israel in its historic homeland, a society based on justice and the spirit of the ancient prophets. I extend to you may very best wishes for the success of this historic event.”

Needless to say, this topic merely exposes Ronald Reagan’s associations with fascists and neofascists. A definitive iconoclasm would take hours to read, even though it would help explain why neofascists like the Daily Stormer admire Reagan, as did fascists like Léon Degrelle, who wrote in 1992 that

Enrichment follows investment, not the other way around. Since Hitler, only Ronald Reagan has seemed to understand this. As President, he realized that to restore prosperity in the United States meant boldly stimulating the economy with credits and a drastic reduction in taxes, instead of waiting for the country to emerge from economic stagnation on its own.

‘Prosperity’ indeed. Between further impoverishing the lower classes, wasting money on anticommunist terrorism, embracing apartheid, neglecting the AIDS crisis by demonizing homosexuals, and impoverishing scores of millions of Easterners, it is easy to understand why antisocialists consecrate this white supremacist.

 

Quoting Russ Bellant’s Old Nazis, the New Right, and the Republican Party: Domestic Fascist Networks and U.S. Cold War Politics, pages xvii–xviii:

It’s May 17, 1985: President Reagan has been back in the nation’s capital less than two weeks from his much-criticized trip to the Bitburg cemetery in Germany. Now, floodlights and television cameras that are part of a President’s entourage are waiting at the Shoreham Hotel, as are 400 luncheon guests.

Ronald Reagan had recently characterized the Nazi Waffen SS as "victims." It seemed a rewrite of the history of World War II rather than a recommitment to its painful lessons. Reagan’s comments held special meaning for some of his afternoon luncheon guests. Although it was a Republican Party affair, it was not the usual GOP set, but a special ethnic outreach unit, the National Republican Heritage Groups (Nationalities) Council (NRHG{N}C). The Republican Heritage Groups Council is an umbrella for various ethnic Republican clubs and operates under the auspices of the Republican National Committee.

If President Reagan needed a boost after the Bitburg fiasco, this was the crowd to supply it. To the assembled media, Reagan’s visit that afternoon appeared as a routine stop, perhaps paying a re-election debt. The Republican Heritage Groups Council did, in fact, help elect Reagan. And they gave him a long standing ovation that afternoon at the Shoreham. To some of those attending the 1985 Council meeting, Reagan’s rehabilitation of the Waffen SS must have offered a sense of personal and historic vindication.

The Republican Heritage Groups Council has a special type of outreach. It appears to have consciously recruited some of its members—and some of its leaders—from an Eastern European émigré network which includes anti­-Semites, racists, authoritarians, and fascists, including sympathizers and collaborators of [the] Third Reich, former [Axis personnel], and even possible war criminals. The persons in this network represent only a radical right fraction of the ethnic communities [that] they claim to represent.

These antidemocratic and racialist components of the Republican Heritage Groups Council use anticommunist sentiments as a cover for their views while they operate as a de facto émigré fascist network within the Republican Party. Some of these less savory antidemocratic personalities were part of the 1987 Republican Heritage Groups Council meeting as well as that 1985 luncheon audience; and some would later join the 1988 election campaign of George [H.W.] Bush.

Ronald Reagan said that it wasn’t what it looked like when he saluted those dead Axis soldiers, but as I am about to show you, we have plenty of reasons to suspect that he was lying about that, such as how he endorsed the so‐called ‘Captive Nations’, which was littered with neofascists and antisemites:

[I]n 1980, Ronald Reagan launched his successful presidential campaign at a Labor Day “ethnic festival” at Liberty State Park in Jersey City. According to Jersey City’s Ukrainian Weekly newspaper, “The majority of the more than 20 ethnic groups taking part in the festival were affiliated with the Captive Nations Committee of New York.” Ivan Dochev died in 2005, but on paper he remains an honorary president of the Captive Nations Committee of New York, which the AF–ABN established in the 1950s.

With a friend of the “captive nations” finally in the White House, the 25th annual Captive Nations Week was dedicated to the fake 40th anniversary of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, and ABN leader Yaroslav Stetsko got an invitation to Washington where he shook hands with President Reagan and Vice President Bush. According to Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party by Russ Bellant, the BNF-affiliated VOC trustee, Radi Slavoff, arranged Ivan Dochev’s 1984 visit to the White House as executive director of the Republican Heritage Groups Council, the GOP’s “special ethnic outreach unit.”

There was possibly some significant overlap between the Republican Heritage Groups Council and the now defunct World Anti-Communist League, of which Ronald Reagan was undeniably a member:

Members of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) — a right wing international cartel of sorts — include[d] such luminaries as Ferdinand Marcos, Rev. Sun Myung Moon, and Adolfo Calero, commander in chief of the armed forces of the FDN contras. The WACL’s roots [went] back to 1954 with the establishment of the Asian People’s Anti-Communist League. [In the 1980s,] the WACL [grew] to six regional organizations with affiliates in more than 90 countries.

One of the most important people in the WACL [was] retired U.S. Major General John Singlaub. Singlaub began his military and intelligence career as an OSS member during World War II. In 1976, he became Chief of Staff of both the United Nations and U.S. Army Forces in South Korea. He was removed in 1977 after he publicly criticized President Jimmy Carter’s withdrawal of troops from Korea.

Singlaub joined WACL in 1980 and formed an American chapter called the United States Council for World Freedom. Singlaub was elected president. Singlaub [gave] the WACL credibility in several ways:

  • President Reagan began calling the contras “freedom fighters” in 1983, a term the WACL and others on the far right have used for years.

  • When U.S. Congress temporarily cut off Nicaraguan contra funding in 1984, a group of various American conservative leaders raised $25 million in private “contributions.” Singlaub and the WACL were at the center of the campaign.

  • Several WACL members [had] been appointed as ambassadors to the Bahamas, Costa Rica, and Guatemala by Reagan.

Then, at the 17th Annual WACL Conference, held in San Diego, California, Singlaub read a letter which said in part, “The World Anti-Communist League has long played a leadership role in drawing attention to the gallant struggle now being waged by the true freedom fighters of our day. Nancy and I send our best wishes for every future success.” The letter was signed by Ronald Reagan.

The WACL [was] so extreme — according to Scott and Jon Lee Anderson who wrote INSIDE THE LEAGUE, an exposé of the WACL — that the John Birch Society […] shunned it and advise[d] its members to do likewise.

Geoffry Stewart-Smith, a staunch British anti-communist, left the WACL because it is “largely a collection of Nazis, fascists, anti-Semites, sellers of forgeries, vicious racialists and corrupt self-seekers. It has evolved into an anti-Semitic international […] the very existence of this organization is a total disgrace to the free world.”

Reagan knew what he meant when he said that the Abraham Lincoln Brigade fought on the ‘wrong side’ in the Spanish Civil War. While he might have been demented as early as the 1980s, it is absurdly unlikely that anybody would willingly associate with these types all by mistake.

Aside from these and a former HJ member whom he very briefly employed before firing for unrelated reasons, some of Reagan’s other associates included

J. Peter Grace — A scion of the Grace fortunes, he [was] head of Reagan’s commission to study domestic economic cuts.[56] For 30 years his company employed Otto Ambrose, [an Axis] war criminal from the German drug cartel I.G. Farben. Ambrose, a chemist, developed “Zyklon B,” the actual gas used in the chambers to kill the Jews and others deemed “inferior.”[57] The German steel group, Flick, which has extensive [Axis] ties in the past and whose scandals [were] rocking German politics [in the 1980s], hold a controlling stock interest in the Grace company.[58]

The Grace family is intimately involved with the formation of the anti-Communist American Institute for Free Labor Development (AIFLD).[59] AIFLD played a key rôle in the Kissinger plan to overthrow Allende in Chile, and insert the ruling [para]fascist Pinochet.[60] After the coup, which involved American Green Berets,[61] Kissinger sent a Mr. Rauff from the State Department to advise the newly formed Chilean secret police (DINA). Rauff had been in charge of the “mobile ovens” used to kill [Roma] and Jews, homosexuals and political dissidents in Eastern Europe for the [Third Reich].[62] These same forces were later involved in the assassination of Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier in Washington, D.C.[63]

Helene von Damm — Personal White House appointment secretary long-time personal secretary to Ronald Reagan, she stands to be appointed Ambassador to Vienna, and controls all cabinet level appointments in the Reagan administration.[64] She came to the United States in the 1950s in the company of Albrecht Otto von Bolschwing, and worked for him as a translator.[65] Von Bolschwing gave the direct orders to Adolph Eichmann in the dread[ed] Eisenstatz, group, the SS killers.[66] Helene’s husband, Christian von Damm, ran the Bank of America in La Paz, Bolivia, which defaulted on a huge U.S. loan.[67]

[Footnote](Reagan was also an acquaintance of Errol Flynn, whom Charles Higham infamously claimed had his own associations with Fascists, but this accusation seems to be based more on guesswork than evidence; it is only a rumor.)

The Reagan régime had no interest in pursuing Axis war criminals. Quoting Eric Lichtblau’s The Nazis Next Door: How America became a Safe Haven for Hitler’s Men, chapter 12:

Ignored for decades, [Axis officials] in America had suddenly become a political flash point by the time Ronald Reagan was in the White House, with anger fomenting on all sides. The vigilantes leaving bombs on the doorsteps of ex-Nazis were only part of the firestorm.

Many conservative Cold Warriors were furious, too, but for very different reasons. While the Jewish militants were angry that the American justice system hadn’t gone far enough to track down ex-Nazis, the conservatives were upset that it had gone too far, playing right into the hands of the Communists, they charged. Inside the gates of the White House, the conservative critics found a fierce ally in President Reagan’s own firebrand advisor, Pat Buchanan.

Buchanan, a former Nixon aide with a rapier tongue and a pugnacious personality, didn’t mask his disdain for what he called the “revenge-obsessed” and “hairy-chested Nazi hunters” at the Justice Department. He believed that the entire Nazi-hunting team should be abolished, and from his prominent perch in Washington—as a top aide to Reagan at the White House, in his nationally syndicated newspaper columns, and in his frequent cable-TV appearances—he launched what amounted to a one-man PR assault through the 1980s. The Justice Department had better things to do than “running down seventy-year-old camp guards,” Buchanan wrote, or “wallowing in the atrocities of a dead regime.”

(Emphasis added in most cases.)

Reagan’s last fifteen minutes of shame came out in 2019, when Timothy J. Naftali published a telephone conversation that Governor Reagan had with President Richard Nixon, in which Gov. Reagan ridiculed Africans. (Reagan supported presidential candidate Richard Nixon in the 1960s, and ex-president Nixon would return the favor in the 1980s.) A less well known example was when Gov. Reagan dismissed three Jewish chaplains, understandingly provoking accusations of antisemitism:

Governor Ronald Reagan’s dismissal of three Jewish chaplains, the entire complement ministering on a full time basis to patients of that faith in California’s 14 mental hospitals, is a “blatant act of anti-Semitism.” That was the statement today of Percy Moore, executive director of Oakland’s anti-poverty program and the president of the California Community Action Program Directors Association, a state-wide organization composed of anti-poverty leaders.

Moore, who is black, said that the elimination of all three Jewish chaplains, effective July 1, while some 33 Catholic and Protestant chaplains are retained for full-time work in the mental hospitals, is “nothing more than a blatant act of anti-Semitism that is right in line with other recent acts of the Governor that discriminate against the poor and the sick, and with special impact of those of the minority groups.”

Rabbi Harry Hyman agreed. Of course, given Reagan’s tokenization of Jews, and more importantly, his support for the occupation of Palestine, too many people were willing to forgive or forget this episode. Nevertheless, Reagan’s support was not for Jews in general, but Herzlians like the Hebrew fascist Zeʻev Vladimir Jabotinsky, whom he admired:

“Few are the leaders who in their own lifetime have become a legend. Zeʻev Vladimir Jabotinsky to whom you pay tribute was such a leader. He was a soldier, statesman and poet who believed in the sanctity of the individual. He was a visionary who dreamt of a free Israel in its historic homeland, a society based on justice and the spirit of the ancient prophets. I extend to you may very best wishes for the success of this historic event.”

Needless to say, this topic merely exposes Ronald Reagan’s associations with fascists and neofascists. A definitive iconoclasm would take hours to read, even though it would help explain why neofascists like the Daily Stormer admire Reagan, as did fascists like Léon Degrelle, who wrote in 1992 that

Enrichment follows investment, not the other way around. Since Hitler, only Ronald Reagan has seemed to understand this. As President, he realized that to restore prosperity in the United States meant boldly stimulating the economy with credits and a drastic reduction in taxes, instead of waiting for the country to emerge from economic stagnation on its own.

‘Prosperity’ indeed. Between further impoverishing the lower classes, wasting money on anticommunist terrorism, embracing apartheid, neglecting the AIDS crisis by demonizing homosexuals, and impoverishing scores of millions of Easterners, it is easy to understand why antisocialists consecrate this white supremacist.

These Herzlians all need electroconvulsive therapy. In their case they’d actually come out of the process wiser than they were beforehand.

 

Bassem Naʻeem, a senior Hamas official, told Al-Aqsa TV on Tuesday that the movement has informed mediators of its readiness to engage in a new round of negotiations, but not based on the proposal presented by U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

He explained that Hamas cannot accept any agreement unless it includes a clear commitment to ending the war, saying: “Witkoff came back to us with a paper that is completely different from the one we had previously approved. It contains vague wording that does not guarantee a halt to the war on Gaza.”

Naʻeem also noted that many countries, including Israel’s allies, have become convinced that […] Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the main obstacle to reaching a ceasefire agreement.

“We will not miss any opportunity to stop the war and ease the suffering of our people, provided there is a credible guarantee,” he stated.

Earlier on Tuesday, the Saudi TV channel Al-Hadath reported, citing unnamed Palestinian sources, that indirect negotiations over a ceasefire in Gaza have continued in recent days.

According to those sources, Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey have been pressing Hamas to show flexibility in its position amid Israeli intransigence. They added that mediators are waiting for Hamas to accept Witkoff’s revised proposal, which includes adjustments concerning prisoner exchange and increased humanitarian aid.

The sources also said that the mediators are pushing to reach a ceasefire before the start of Eid al-Adha.

“They have offered Hamas an American guarantee ensuring Israel’s compliance with the ceasefire terms. Discussions over ending the war would reportedly take place during the truce period,” the mediators added.

 

Mahdi Al-Mashat, president of the Supreme Political Council — the highest governing authority in the Houthi-led administration in Sanaa — called on all companies investing in Israel to take the Yemeni warning seriously and to withdraw quickly, stressing that the environment is no longer safe. His remarks were reported by Houthi-run media.

“Companies that remain in the Zionist entity after our warning will have to bear the consequences of their insistence and be held accountable for any losses they may incur,” he added.

“We may take additional decisions in the coming days, if necessary, which would place investment companies within the Zionist entity at real and serious risk.”

“The disregard shown by some investment firms for our forces’ warnings makes their operations inside the entity a dangerous gamble, which could come at a heavy cost,” Al-Mashat added.

He accused the […] occupation government of failing to protect the interests of private companies, saying: “The criminal Netanyahu government does not care about the safety of investment companies. It gambles with their security to serve its own interests. A government that ignores the lives of its own captives will certainly not care about the safety of others’ companies and investments.”

 

According to the latest YouGov Eurotrack survey, conducted between 12 and 26 May in Britain, France, Germany, Denmark, Spain and Italy, public sympathy has shifted decisively towards Palestinians across Europe. In every country surveyed, more respondents said they sympathised with the Palestinian side than with Israel.

In the UK, 32 per cent said [that] they sympathised more with Palestinians, compared to just 14 per cent with Israel. The same pattern was evident in France (24 per cent Palestine vs 18 per cent Israel), Germany (18 per cent vs 17 per cent), Denmark (28 per cent vs 18 per cent), Spain (33 per cent vs 15 per cent), and Italy (31per cent vs 7 per cent). This marks a clear and consistent rejection of Israeli narratives in favour of Palestinian perspectives.

The survey also found minimal support for Israel’s ongoing assault on Gaza. When asked whether Israel’s military response to the Hamas attacks of 7 October had been proportionate, only 6 per cent of Italians and 16 per cent of the French agreed. In the UK, the figure stood at just 12 per cent.

Across all six countries, larger proportions—between 29 per cent (Italy) and 40 per cent (Germany)—felt that while Israel was right to send troops, it had gone too far and caused excessive civilian casualties.

The data reflects growing outrage at Israel’s unrelenting bombardment of Gaza, which has killed over 54,000 Palestinians—many of them women and children—and wounded more than 120,000 since 7 October. The occupation state resumed its assault in mid-March after breaking a ceasefire, imposing a blockade that has precipitated a famine across the besieged territory.

The public’s capacity to understand the Palestinian viewpoint, even among those who may not fully agree, was notably high. In the UK, 51 per cent of respondents said they could understand the Palestinian perspective, compared with 40 per cent who said the same for Israel.

Opposition to Israel is also growing across the Atlantic. A Pew Research Centre poll in April found that more than half of Americans (53 per cent) now hold an unfavourable view of Israel, up from 42 per cent in March 2022. A separate survey by Data for Progress showed that 51 per cent of U.S. voters oppose Israel’s plan to send more troops into Gaza, and the same number believe former President Donald Trump should demand a ceasefire.

[–] AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 1 day ago (3 children)

homosexuality was in the DSM

Distinguished Service Medal?

 

Quoting Gabriella Romano’s The Pathologisation of Homosexuality in Fascist Italy: The Case of ‘G’, page 29:

Virility, [George L.] Mosse argued, became a national symbol during the régime, embodied by the dictator’s himself, his physique, his behaviour and way of addressing the crowds, his gestures; dandyism, weakness, effeminacy were perceived as anything that stood in the way, anything that was anti-Mussolini and his ideology.

Furthermore, as the régime concentrated on demographic campaigns, homosexuality came to be perceived as sterile and therefore essentially anti-fascist and selfish, against what was good for the nation. The New Italian Man’s actions were to be inspired by his love for the country: private life was considered a responsible act towards the nation, sexuality had to be aimed at procreation.

(Emphasis added. Click here for more.)

Every Italian had the duty to be physically and morally fit, the régime insisted on the necessity to practice regular physical activity that would guarantee strength and health. Anybody that appeared different from this norm was considered as visibly contesting fascist ideals: the anti-New Man stereotype was lazy, weak, cowardly, undisciplined, selfish in its anti-family choice and therefore a scrounger and a parasite of society. His refusal to be an integral part of civilised life made him ugly, disharmonious, ridiculous.

Zuccarello¹³ investigated these concepts further, showing how effeminacy came to equal “ugliness” under Fascism, the opposite of grace, strength and classically-inspired beauty: the homosexual was portrayed as thin, emaciated, pale, his eyes reddened by vice. A concept that the psychiatric profession took to its extreme consequences, in accordance with Lombroso’s theories: deviancy, as mentioned, was thought to have some identifiable physical traits, homosexuals, criminals, prostitutes were examined, in search for some physical points of resemblance that would allow categorisation.

 

Quoting Gabriella Romano’s The Pathologisation of Homosexuality in Fascist Italy: The Case of ‘G’, page 29:

Virility, [George L.] Mosse argued, became a national symbol during the régime, embodied by the dictator’s himself, his physique, his behaviour and way of addressing the crowds, his gestures; dandyism, weakness, effeminacy were perceived as anything that stood in the way, anything that was anti-Mussolini and his ideology.

Furthermore, as the régime concentrated on demographic campaigns, homosexuality came to be perceived as sterile and therefore essentially anti-fascist and selfish, against what was good for the nation. The New Italian Man’s actions were to be inspired by his love for the country: private life was considered a responsible act towards the nation, sexuality had to be aimed at procreation.

(Emphasis added. Click here for more.)

Every Italian had the duty to be physically and morally fit, the régime insisted on the necessity to practice regular physical activity that would guarantee strength and health. Anybody that appeared different from this norm was considered as visibly contesting fascist ideals: the anti-New Man stereotype was lazy, weak, cowardly, undisciplined, selfish in its anti-family choice and therefore a scrounger and a parasite of society. His refusal to be an integral part of civilised life made him ugly, disharmonious, ridiculous.

Zuccarello¹³ investigated these concepts further, showing how effeminacy came to equal “ugliness” under Fascism, the opposite of grace, strength and classically-inspired beauty: the homosexual was portrayed as thin, emaciated, pale, his eyes reddened by vice. A concept that the psychiatric profession took to its extreme consequences, in accordance with Lombroso’s theories: deviancy, as mentioned, was thought to have some identifiable physical traits, homosexuals, criminals, prostitutes were examined, in search for some physical points of resemblance that would allow categorisation.

 

(Mirrors.)

In every comparison I can make, the Gazan situation is worse than what my direct and our family’s direct experience was.

 

A woman was murdered in her home in central Israel on Monday, one of several killings in recent days that have fueled growing criticism of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Israel's handling of violent crime.

The victim, in her 40s, was allegedly stabbed by her partner, who later barricaded himself on the roof of their building and threatened to jump. Police said a negotiation team is currently engaging with the suspect. An investigation has been opened.

The murder was one of five reported since Sunday, including two fatal shootings early Monday in central Israel and the discovery of a woman and her 13-year-old son dead in a burned apartment. Since the start of the year, 121 people have been murdered in Israel, including 15 women.

In Netanya on Monday morning, a man in his 30s was shot, and Magen David Adom emergency services reported that he had been wounded in a fight. According to a police source, the victim was known to police and had prior convictions for violent offenses, extortion, and robbery, for which he had previously served prison time.

Earlier, in Lod, Noor Moussa, a man in his 20s, was also shot and killed, and another man, aged 25, was moderately wounded.

Moussa, who was not known to police, was shot while riding a motorcycle, reportedly as part of his job as a delivery courier. Police suspect it is the result of a local feud between criminals in the city, and they are investigating if Moussa was the intended target or not.

Three suspects in their 20s were arrested Monday morning in connection with the murder. Police said they would request an extension of their detention, though two of the suspects were released shortly afterward.

On Sunday, a 51-year-old woman and her 13-year-old son were found dead in a burned apartment in Modi'in. Police suspect [that] she killed her son and then took her own life, though other leads are being examined.

MK Meirav Ben-Ari (Yesh Atid) addressed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on X (formerly known as Twitter): "What did you think would happen when you appointed a criminal as national security minister? That there would be calm? That he'd show everyone who's 'the boss'? Not a single criminal respects him, and your citizens are paying the heavy price."

She added that "the police force is paralyzed and crippled, most appointments are sycophants, lacking knowledge and professionalism."

Leader of The Democrats Yair Golan issued a similar rebuke on X (formerly known as Twitter): "Another day and a half in Israel — another five murders. No governance, no security. From every sector and community, no citizen is safe … This is what a country looks like when the minister in charge of police is a convicted criminal, an avowed racist and Kahanist — all under the direction of the prime minister."

 

Three Israeli soldiers were killed in the northern Gaza Strip on Monday when an explosive device that had been planted on the logistical route they were travelling through in the Jabalya area detonated beneath their Humvee.

The three soldiers were named as Staff Sergeant Lior Steinberg, aged 20, from Petah Tikva; Staff Sergeant Ofek Barhana, aged 20, from Yavne; and Staff Sergeant Omer Van Gelder, aged 22, from Ma'ale Adumim, who was a relative of Staff Sergeant (Res.) Omer Gaeldor, who was killed some six months ago in a drone strike in southern Lebanon.

Two other soldiers were moderately wounded in the incident and were evacuated to hospitals for treatment.

Following the explosion, forces were dispatched to evacuate the casualties from the area, which was rigged with additional explosives. There was no fighting during the evacuation.

An IDF official said that the five soldiers had been taking part in an operation to destroy terror infrastructure both above and below ground.

On Sunday, IDF chief Eyal Zamir ordered the expansion of the Israeli army's ground operation in the Gaza Strip and ordered the establishment of additional aid distribution centers for the residents of Gaza. During a tour of southern Gaza, Zamir said that Hamas has lost control and that the offensive is continuing "according to a structured plan, at an adjusted pace, until all combat objectives are achieved: the return of all our hostages and the elimination of Hamas' governing and military capabilities."

Two days earlier, military operations had expanded in several densely populated areas in the northern part of Gaza, and the IDF declared five locations in the area as "dangerous combat zones." IDF Arabic spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an evacuation warning to residents of Jabalya and other nearby neighborhoods, urging them to move westward due to the presence of terrorist organizations.

Since October 7, 2023, a [confirmed] total of 861 soldiers have fallen in combat. Since Israel ended the cease-fire with Hamas on March 18, twelve soldiers and one officer from the Border Police's undercover unit have been killed in Gaza. One soldier was also killed in an operational traffic accident in the Gaza border area after being run over by a truck, and another combat soldier was killed in a separate operational traffic accident in the Golan Heights.

No comment.

 

The 2023 increase in anti-LGBTIQ+ bills preceding the 2024 U.S. presidential election manifested the most aggressive punitive freedom restrictions and the greatest expansion across all (even Democrat-run) states and criminalisation of a variety of TGD people, family supporters and professionals. The expanded freedom reduction within anti-LGBTIQ+ bills by 2023 indicated (neo)fascist efforts beyond the politically symbolic, towards pragmatically effective freedom reductions especially targeting TGD ‘cultural Marxist enemies’, to reduce freedom generally (Mason, 2022).

The study showed the 2023 bills upped targeted freedom restriction age-groups from childhood to adolescence/adulthood, extended targeted education contexts from elementary to higher education, expanded targeted locations from school bath/changerooms to spaces beyond education (e.g. ‘in public’) and extended targeted groups from TGD to broader groups (LGBTIQA+ people, professionals, women, parents, religious people, patients, citizens).

The freer the market, the freer the (white) people.

[–] AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The John Birch Society might be run by petty bourgeois neofascists if they’re gullible enough to believe that we operate a corporation. Small capitalists loathe their corporate competitors but tend to hate us more so.

An ice axe, but otherwise yes, sadly.

The managers declared they could not tolerate such disruptions, and hinted forebodingly that, ‘a substantial number of tensions and problems arise from the co-habitation of a large number of women, therein also young girls.’¹¹⁴ That is, the managers worried a single-sex female environment lent itself to rampant lesbianism.

(Source herein.)

I have no comment.

[–] AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I remember when Herzlians insisted that the Shoah was unique and incomparable to any other massacre in history. Now their victim complex is so overwhelming that they had to make an exhibit likening the October 7 incident to the Shoah.

For me, though, the best proof that Herzlians are basically just concern trolls when it comes to the Shoah is that almost none of them have anything to say about how the White Armies and their allies annihilated 115,000 Jews from 1917–1921. That was probably the biggest loss of Jewish life until the Shoah yet I hardly ever see anybody mention it. A few days ago I asked three Jewish adults if they had ever heard of Symon Petliura and none of them had any clue whom the fuck I was talking about. Shouldn’t it be someone’s job to educate them on this history?

No, that would be giving him what he wants!

[–] AnarchoBolshevik@lemmygrad.ml 45 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (8 children)

I’ve noticed that a lot of complaints about the people’s republics is that their stuff isn’t fancy enough. Only one kind of soap, only one kind of apartment, only a handful of cars and they were all unimpressive. Antisocialists either never notice or never care that they have the privilege to be picky.

view more: next ›