In re: Accelerationist arguments on Bibi’s re-election

I would advise those who are expressing “relief” about Likud’s victory in the recent Israeli election to exercise a bit of caution. While it’s true that Netanyahu’s re-election is provoking a massive outcry from liberal Zionists and general moderates on the Palestinian question, this might not be the best thing for the Palestine movement.

Let’s take a trip back in time to the US administration of George W. Bush. During this time period there was a lot of cross-collaboration between the radical left, movement progressives and partisan liberal Democrats. Both Democratic politicians and prominent liberals wrapped themselves in faux-radical anti-imperialist rhetoric about the evils of the Iraq War. Of course, as we all know, as soon as Obama became elected they mostly kept quiet about the rampant militarism the US continued to engaged in. Some lefties look at this as a sign that when Bush was in office the left was more “motivated” to take on US imperialism. I would argue that this was not exactly the case.

Sure, there may have been a few liberals who were radicalized by the excesses of the Bush regime and remained committed critics and antiwar activists under the Obama regime. But overall, I think what we saw under the Bush administration was a lot of opportunism being mistaken for radicalization.

Basically my argument boils down to this: if certain people required an Evil Republican to be in office in order to agitate against the US war machine, were they really such great allies to begin with? It’s a contradiction to argue that Republican presidents “mobilize” the left because a lot of the mobilization is done by Democratic partisans and ideological liberals who want to maintain the US empire in their own fashion.

The same cynicism should be used when approaching the widespread liberal backlash against Bibi’s triumph. Are these critics being radicalized into supporting a comprehensive movement against Israeli apartheid and colonialism with equal rights for all residents of historic Palestine as its goal? Or do they simply want to maintain a two-state “solution” that rescues Israel from the “threat” of more Arabs voting in their elections and taking part in their society — all while preserving a facade of moral superiority over those uncouth right-wingers?

Just something to think about.