President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of the Islamic Republic of Iran (the Aryan nation) is perhaps gratuitously concerned about Zionist racism (as an Aryan he need not be). He is indeed correct that Zionism is racism. Even Albert Einstein, the secular humanist but not an atheist, did not like the idea of Zionism that traces back to Theodor Herzl of Germany in the late 19th century. He had gone along with Israel being a Zionist state, albeit being Hitler’s Jewish refugee to the United States who had given the world the power of the atom, because he had somehow felt, on balance, that at that time given the momentum behind the Zionists, that was the only way to go to save the European Jewry.
The Jewish people, after all, constitute a small portion of the world’s population. They always did, both before and after the Holocaust. The Holocaust, however, had dangerously diminished their numbers and Israel had rebuilt the population through the kibbutz and immigration of the global Jewry to the new Israeli state. Small numbers typically do not have a disproportionate influence on global affairs. Still, such is the case, once again, nearly one hundred years after the First World War when the Zionist movement first began to take hold in Europe.
Just as it is the case today in the United States, the Jews had then come to dominate the academia and finance in Europe causing social tensions by claiming intellectual and economic power on the one hand, while remaining exclusive on the other. In fact, it is the inbred exclusivity in the Jewish culture that enabled the Jewish people to both assimilate and remain exclusive in the societies to which they migrated or into which they were born. Intermarriage was typically on the Jewish terms of matrilineal lineage.
Western democracies, which were not all democracies one hundred years ago, having resolved to solving the lopsided influence of the European Jewry in European affairs wanted to make space for the European Jewry in Palestine. And thus was created the state of Israel in 1947, after World War II.
No western democracy, as a matter of realpolitik, should have any large stake in Israel. After all, it is a country with few natural resources but for being the land of origin of three religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, though in reality both Christianity and Islam have their social and institutional roots elsewhere―in the Vatican in Rome in today’s Italy, and in Mecca and Medina in today’s Saudi Arabia, respectively.
The global Jewish influence to bend world affairs in their favor is unusually skewed relative to the small numbers of the global Jewry. Any Nobel economist, more than half of them being Jewish, would conclude that the data exhibits kurtosis, let alone skewness for plainly ideological reasons, contradicting the grasp of their own faith, almost exclusively, again on academia and finance just as was the case before World War II, along with entertainment and journalism, but this time coopting the secular power of the west, unlike before World War II.
After the Holocaust the global Jewry has learned to coopt its one-time oppressor to become the oppressor itself in the name of Judeo-Christianity, an alien concept before 1947, rather than to empathize with the rest of the persecuted, for whatever reason, to end persecution. The data, therefore, needs normalization and this means making better policy to make the world more inclusive. Claim over exclusivity is exclusively a Jewish trait and its tentacles are palpable in how world affairs are being conducted today.
To rid the world of this ideology, it is important that the Zionist state of Israel and its apologists around the world, both on the left and the right, in the capitals of the world’s major economies in the west, be taught to coexist. The raison d’etre of the west is not Israel. Israel must join the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and be willing to get on a path of complete denuclearization.