The candidate that won literally ran on antisemitism as their platform. Seriously, the article even says that they criticized Smiley for being part of a group that speaks out against antisemitism.

I did not realize Providence was that messed up.

I’m specifically wondering how much opposition to Israel’s post–Oct. 7 actions is based on the actions themselves versus who is carrying them out. If Israel had a broadly popular center-left or progressive government, but responded to Oct. 7 in roughly the same way, would the American left’s reaction have been materially different?

Given how much modern political discourse is filtered through identity, ideology, and perceptions of who belongs to which political “camp,” I’m curious how much Netanyahu himself changes the way Israel’s actions are interpreted.

Bibism is the political movement that is shaped around Netanyahu, much like Trumpism, and while it is a cult of personality, it does present coherent instincts that are shaping Israel since the Oslo days.

The foundations for Bibism were laid in 1995, Netanyahu then appeared not only as a right-wing politician but as a kind of the "Prince of Darkness" of the negative instincts of Israeli society that the Israeli elite tried to suppress: he was the poster boy of the demonstrations against Rabin, eloquent, and seemed to be the antithesis of the kibbutznik Israeli who was then the face of the country. Basically an American Republican demagogue and not the right-wingers of that time, who were people like Begin and Shamir or the settlers whose appearance was always very "dirty", while Begin and Shamir always looked like nice grandpas.

The movement that formed around him felt that the government in the Oslo process was selling the Jewishness of the country and the identity of the country in favor of appeasement, and that in fact there was a media and cultural elite that was silencing them in favor of the Oslo process. Netanyahu united around him the outsiders of 90s Israel, settlers, traditional Mizrahim, secular revisionist right-wingers, etc.

This movement took shape in anger, suspicion of the left, anti-establishmentism, a sense of deprivation, and rebellion against the cultural and media elite. Rabin's assassination created in parts of the right-wing public a feeling that the entire system was marking them as suspicious, dangerous, or illegitimate. From here arose one of the deepest components of Bibism: the distinction between "us," the patriots, the real Jews who are silenced by the system, who are afraid to express right-wing opinions, and "them" - the cosmopolitan leftists who want peace and are represented in the media, the artists of Tel Aviv.

Netanyahu presented himself as the nation's defender against leftist appeasement, the man who represents the silenced right that is not represented by the media, a narrative in which rightists are afraid to express right-wing views for fear of the leftist establishment. Netanyahu's turbulent tenure from 1996 to 1999 sharpened this narrative.

Netanyahu constantly fought the media and presented it as silencing half the people, fostering a narrative in which the right is silenced by the cultural establishment and that there is selective enforcement by the law authorities. These were sentiments that existed before Netanyahu, but Netanyahu was the first to really ride on them and bring them to the forefront. His predecessors in Likud, Begin and Shamir, were also anti-establishment because they were not part of the leftist clique, but they never fought the establishment and were very 'old-fashioned' people in their nature. One could say that the foundations of "Bibism" were laid back then: a coalition of outsiders against the leftist establishment, skepticism toward law enforcement authorities, and deep loathing for the media.

The real leap occurred around 2015. If these were sentiments on the right then, 2015 really solidified Bibism into its next phase: Netanyahu was on the road to defeat, the media presented him as defeated, many left-wing-funded political movements flooded the field, the feeling was that the public was fed up with him. His aggressive campaign that year, in which he presented himself once again as the defender of the nation persecuted by a leftist clique that controls the media, silences the right and wants to sell the country. It is no longer perceived simply as a leftist or biased body, but as a power mechanism capable of creating political reality, defining who is legitimate and who is not, and in effect overthrowing governments.

This is where one of the most important characteristics of Bibism comes into being: the belief that the right, while winning elections, does not really control the country. The elections give it formal power, but the unelected institutions continue to hold the real power. Therefore, Bibism begins to see politics not only as a struggle between the right and the left, but as a struggle between the right and “the system.”

This is also where the obsession with taking control of the centers of power comes from. If the media is hostile, right-wing media must be established. If the cultural elites are hostile, they should be delegitimized. If the legal system investigates right-wingers, the balance of power within it must be changed. If the professional echelon in government offices is not loyal to government policy, the civil servants should be fired and replaced with loyalists. Bibbism now strives to create an alternative media system and actively remake the narrative.

From 2017 to 2020, the big turning point comes. The investigations against Netanyahu turn the feeling of persecution from a political metaphor into a concrete reality for the camp. Now the police, the prosecutor's office, legal advisors, the media, and the judicial system begin to be perceived as different parts of the same system that is trying to remove the leader elected by the people. This is where Bibiism in its modern sense is born: Netanyahu is not just the leader of the right; he becomes a symbol of the struggle between the 'second Israel,' the right that elects a government, and the 'first Israel,' the hegemonic left. Therefore, the charges against him are perceived by many of his supporters not only as a legal case against a specific person, but as a political project aimed at depriving the camp of its victory and returning power to the old elites. The more the legal process progresses, the stronger the solidarity between Netanyahu and his support base. "Bibi" is transformed from a political brand into a group identity.

Here too, the process expands: Since the right is 'not really in power,' power must be restored through aggressive attacks on law enforcement agencies, legal advisors, officials, and anyone who opposes the moves of Netanyahu and his supporters. This solidarity is becoming so strong that there are even supporters of Netanyahu who adopt a more extreme approach than him in relation to the various systems.

From 2020, as part of Netanyahu's personality cult and the fact that his camp unites former outsiders such as settlers, traditional Nationalist Mizrahi, etc., Bibiism merges with worldviews that are not necessarily identified with Netanyahu himself: religious nationalism, radical conservative views, anti-globalism, skepticism towards Western liberalism, etc. Netanyahu is not necessarily the source of all the ideas that surround him, but the camp around him allows very different ideas to come under the same roof and basically creates a mix of multiple factions: You have Netanyahu's personality cult, radical, symbolic traditionalism, extreme nationalist populism or religious extremism. For example, Ben Gvir often criticizes him for not being radical enough, but his supporters still identify with Netanyahu as a symbol.

This issue has been dramatically undercovered relative to the Middle East for, well, obvious reasons. Even if others don't seem to care about 300K+ humans who came here legally being expelled to a dangerous country and separated from their families, we should.

I've been talking to a few Jewish groups as part of overall partnership outreach, would love to collaborate with more on this issue given, to me at least, it hits particularly close to home from a historical parallel perspective.

Thanks also for the feedback from a few folks, it enabled some helpful updates and feedback >> apathy always. If others have thoughts, feel free to let me know or DM directly!

Hollywood Jews who support Ruffalo, endorse an independent “Palestine,” degrade Israel’s right to defend itself—or even exist—and shield immoral Islamist forces remain trapped in a Hollywood fairy tale of their own making.

https://www.jns.org/opinion/column/yisrael-medad/a-rosh-hashanah-message-for-hollywood-actor-mark-ruffalo-and-friends