Israel now in another conflict with local Arabs, and Netanyahu gives another disastrous interview, which he and his supporters will see as a success. 

"You looked wonderful, Bibi"

"Everybody secretly supports us because we wrote the bible, don't worry"

Obviously they are missing part of the picture.


Zionists portray themselves as a tribal group trying to survive against a dangerous melting pot, but their rationale is flawed and self defeating on many levels.

Jews, broadly for the purposes of this page, can be divided into two groups.

1) European Jews, including Zionists, who experienced a lot of persecution in Europe and some of whom saw a Zionist state as a solution.

These people generally have a globalizing worldview, sometimes called 'progressive', but often viewed negatively by others in light of history. Many of the top 'globalizing' influences from Soviet communism for example were Jewish. A simple fact no honest person would dispute. At best a person could say those people had good motives, but their motives did not, and do not, include promoting the survival of other tribes.

Melting pots require ongoing 'tribal sacrifices' in order to survive. A melting pot cannot exist without consuming tribal entities. When a time comes, within a region, when a melting pot no longer can find tribes to consume, it fractures into smaller new entities or, if previous lines are still visible, as has been the case for hundreds of years at least, it reverts to older tribal lines.

So, larger melting pots are now in the position of having very little tribal 'food' i.e., not a lot of tribes remaining which can be consumed.

The state of Israel was created through the cooperation of various entities comprising 'the global melting pot'. Superficially it provided sanctuary to a group which had been oppressed, but that has never been a priority for the melting pot consciousness. It has never been the business of the melting pot to provide sanctuary for tribes, any more than a lion builds homes for the animals it eats.

So would there be any other function which a 'new' tribal group might serve within a melting pot framework? A person should wonder.

Even aside from the obvious, the state of Israel has many other uses which the global melting pot can find. 

Worse, the state of Israel has largely built its political alliances around melting pots. A person can look at most of the states political positions, and they generally involve cooperative efforts with big melting pots to eliminate tribal challengers and use various tools to assimilate victims.

So the basic Zionist position is sort of like a goat that is helping a lion find food in a place where there is little food left. The lion's calculations are smart, he or she lives a little longer through the famine. The goat not so much. It might have less competition for grass or whatever goats eat, but it is also destroying its natural allies and strengthening its real enemy.

2) Middle Eastern Jews, people who are genetically largely from the area of Palestine.

Middle Eastern Jews are famously not a powerful group in Zionist politics, one of the showcase 'brownish peoples' that European Jews tolerate.

The state of Israel has a policy of encouraging, or even forcing, non European Jews under its umbrella, but non European Jews are not near the core of the state and would not be included except that they are necessary in the presentation of the Zionist political entity as "Jewish" rather than "European".

Two birds, one stone?

So, if you were to personify the state of Israel as two groups, you would have

1) A heavily conflicted group which tries to live within a unique worldview, i.e., tries to create a closed society, but feels obligated to patronize and 'join' its most dangerous enemies in the long term, in order to survive in the short term. In other words, those it pals around with are not those who benefit from its survival.

2) A consolidated and well established, but largely powerless, group which, like the previous group, feels obligated to patronize those who are not acting in its long term interests. In this case referring to group 1.

Of course the melting pot mind understands this stratification and supports it. If Zionism ever became about encouraging the survival of tribal entities it would lose all of its powerful global allies at a political level. But it would suddenly become a survivable state. It's battles would be real rather than choreographed.

A fork in the road

At this point Zionists must decide which side they are on.

If their goal is to continue serving as global frontmen for the melting pot then they need to start marching towards Masada.

If their goal is the survival of tribal entities, as states, they need to start supporting that path quickly.

Unfortunately it's clear that the state of Israel will not survive without U.S. support, and the only way it can continue holding U.S. support is to encourage the U.S. slide into becoming a police state.

While that will hasten the breakup of the U.S., it probably will not do it in a productive way.

Alternatively, if Zionists want to pretend Russia is their necessary support, they should study history briefly, quickly.


The motive behind Zionism's self destructive and conflicting alliances are not clear, but a clue might be in the fact that Jews were history's first suicide bombers.

"In full swashbuckling form, he leaped into the fray and approached the imperial pachyderm, single-handedly slaughtering or putting to flight the dozens of enemy soldiers who stood in his way. Then, having positioned himself directly under the beast's soft underbelly, he plunged the blade of his sword into it, knowing that this heroic act would bring about his own demise. This was indeed the outcome of his attack: the animal's immense weight now collapsed onto Eleazar, fatally crushing him. 


An example of a misguided alliance is that between nationalist Hindus and nationalist Israelis.

India is a country with literally hundreds of strong surviving tribal groups, many under the umbrella of Hinduism.

As with Judaism, there once was a tribal group which was the originator of Hinduism.

Evidently that group had decent martial skills thousands of years ago, and just as Judaism spawned occupation religions like Christianity and Islam, so Hinduism also adapted a bit in places where previous tribal theologies had been dominant.

Both Hinduism and Judaism are very sophisticated religions, they can be adapted to any prior set of beliefs. In Judaism the most important belief is in a single deity, but philosophers get around that in Hinduism by viewing the Hindu pantheon or trinity as three, or multiple, sides of a single deity, unless a person specifically wants or needs or accepts multiple deities.

Further, Hindu and Jewish mysticism overlap in an important theological way. Jews start with 'one deity' which is reduced to zero in their mystical tradition. A Jew is taught that above all else there is just one deity, then he or she is taught that their 'one deity' is not something which can be perceived, in other words there is no accurate way to say that there is one deity.

Hindus start with multiple deities which lead them to one deity, then their mystics determine that neither the multiple nor the one is accurate 

So both Hinduism and Judaism are legitimate paths that lead psychologically to the same place, but are still being used by their respective tribal originators for both 'melting pot' and tribal purposes.

That puts the more ambitious among Hindus in a dilemma. 

Both Indians and Jews have experiences with the global melting pot, slightly different experiences.

Those many Indians who focus first on the colonial history with Britain, and thus support Palestinians, are the more liberal part of the Indian population. Because they support the Palestinians generally in the short term, Zionists do not consider them allies.

Those nationalist Indians who support Hindutva, and use that sentiment or 'ideology' to explain or justify actions in areas of India which many liberals oppose e.g. Kashmir etc, are much more conservative, but Zionists see them as allies over short term issues. Sort of like the short term alliances some Zionists made with Nazis. Neither expects nor is interested in the survival of the other, in fact each is conflicted over the other's survival, but they play a short term game. In this case Zionists' more natural long term allies would be the tribals and progressive Hindus who support Palestinian rights, but it's a tough sell to support those who support your enemy over you.

Zionism is trying to force Judaism to revert to a melting pot like its Hindu nationalist short term allies who oppose those progressive Indians who support tribal sovereignty. 

Thousands of years ago, as a few tribal groups expanded easily into the territory of weaker tribes, it would have been a smart alliance.

Today that, and similar, alliances are in a race against time to avoid being overtaken by simple trends. Global society is developing against 'occupation' type nationalist stances, but there is new real estate slowly opening up in outer space, very slowly, a slower trend which will not develop fast enough.

If all of space were opened up immediately violence would reduce to near zero, but in fact it will be many decades, maybe centuries, until there is enough off world space to defuse violence and reduce hunger for local living space.

The 'anti occupation' sentiment is growing rapidly though, especially taking into account the fast increasing abilities of small groups.


Another example of how Zionism is not adapting to 'facts on the ground' in the real world. Like opponents of 'critical race theory', Zionists have been caught in a trap of being forced to defend their current actions by justifying their past actions. Unfortunately for Zionism, trends which favor them are developing more slowly than trends which sabotage them. As with so many popular national strategies, they are stymied by the fact that today isn't 500 years ago. 

Do Jewish people have significant power in the various industries listed? Of course.

Is it partly because Jews have had a lot of influence over popular narratives in the U.S.? Of course.

Is there a counter reaction brewing which the Chinese and others try to capitalize on globally? Of course.

Zionist strategists have been holding the appearance of 'strong aces' for a long time, trusting them the way a child trusts a blanket. Perhaps the worst mistake Zionists have made is inculcating that trust into the foundation of their society. Like a cow being led to slaughter, they trust the guardians who have been feeding them.

The only path to survival for the Zionist state is to make a sharp turn towards tribal states globally, follow a trend which is happening anyway, and to renounce their fantasy of being the only survivable tribal entity in a global melting pot.

One of Zionism's weakest points is its inability to use common sense when common sense is inconvenient. 

In that case, a supporter of Zionism is making silly arguments.

If you presented anybody with the Gaza/Israel situation, but omitted the words Gaza and Israel, in other words if you took the exact same situation, but camouflaged it by putting it in a different region with different groups, almost anybody would support the Palestinians.

If you then added in the variable "One of the groups is wealthy and powerful", a lot of people would support that wealthy, powerful group, whichever side it was. So many 'tribal' questions are really status questions.

This is one of many small things creating a larger environment which probably spells the end for Zionism. Gradually the state of Israel is being drawn into supporting countries which ignore common sense the way it does. The state of Israel was never a Jewish state. The only thing 'Jewish' about it is that most of its victims ultimately will be Jewish.

Before the state of Israel was formed, the British offered Kenya to Jews as a homeland.

The British were trying to cement their control of Africa through proxies, and it was an attractive deal to a lot of people. One roadblock was that there were Brits who had a lot of power in Africa and didn't want Jews on 'their' turf. 

The skewed Genetic history of Judaism gives it a mandatory path

Jews are on a genetic path similar to Neanderthals. 

In early Jewish history the main mix of lines which would eventually be incorporated into Judaism were of male Jewish and female tribal.

Hence, most Jews today have a distinct male tribal lineage to Judaism and a mix of female lineages beyond that to female members of various tribes.

Females in Judaism who do not have a continuous direct or semi direct link to the original tribe, i.e., the vast majority of female Jews, are tribal 'genetic prisoners' with a conflicted motive until either a) 'Jewish political power' gets stronger and they reassemble as tribal groups or b) 'Jewish political power' gets weaker and they retreat defensively to their Jewish identity.

In case 'a' it fragments Judaism as a tribal entity and leads eventually to the Neanderthal fate. In case 'b' Judaism stays in a 'pending' phase until it is either conquered or gets stronger and goes toward the Neanderthal ending.

As described on the Unwinding page, this has the effect of creating female Jewish lineages which are sort of prisoners to the dominant male lineage.

The solution is to either re establish the power of those incorporated tribal lineages or let nature take its course and reabsorb the male Jewish lines.

Tribal vs melting pot has an obvious winner in the long term. While earth is still the only habitable place, the melting pot has reached its limits and its decay will only accelerate. So tribals will win through the destruction of melting pots, however messy it may become, unless the melting pots aggressively retreat, very unlikely considering human nature.

Once space opens up, melting pots will have the ability to expand, but so will tribes. At that point though, there will be new dynamics which put any group in the position of an early tribe.

U.S. media has always presented Israeli talking points as 'news'

This article is the same as thousands of articles over the last 50 years. What is different is that while the audience has evolved, the articles have not.

A lot of Jews thought Trump was 'put in power' to help them. 

"Look at how much power we have."


Competing views

Different worldviews, some of which are valid 

1) Israeli view

"If we punish them enough they will become desperate for the basic necessities"

"Hamas' popularity seemed to be growing as it positioned itself as a defender of Palestinian claims to Jerusalem...On Friday, hours after the cease-fire took effect, thousands of Palestinians in the Al-Aqsa compound chanted against Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his self-rule government. “Dogs of the Palestinian Authority, out, out," they shouted, and "The people want the president to leave.”

2) Egyptian government view

"The Americans have always paid us in dollars, and so far all is well"

"Abbas met Saturday with Egyptian mediators, discussing the rebuilding of Gaza and internal Palestinian relations, according to the official Palestinian news agency Wafa.

3) Melting pot 1 view

"Lots of food on the table. Everybody get dressed."

4) Melting pot 2 view

"How are we going to divide this up with melting pot 1?"

One of the many confusions among Zionists is whether their state is a melting pot or a tribal enclave.

Zionism's tribal claim is based on the lineage of Abraham.

One problem with that is that a single family cannot claim to have had thousands of square miles so long ago. The current size of the compressed Israeli state is ~8,500 square miles.

So Zionism looks at land conquered by that tribe along with its allies and assimilated conquered groups that it absorbed.

Nothing wrong with that in the melting pot form of reckoning, but if Zionists want respect as a tribal entity, they have to provide a 'path to sovereignty' for their composite conquered parts.

This would be very doable, and even progressive, if there were abundant vacant land into which their elements could expand, which there is not. The alternative to this, which has already happened to some extent, is an expulsion into the diaspora. The next intelligent step then would have been a retreat to all of the hidden tribal entities, not simply to one of them.

A second front they could open, but which they have shown no proclivity for, is the development or more accurately redevelopment, of those parts. This would give them a natural, rather than political, basis for their sandbox state, but it would open them up to more threats from 'the global melting pot', which has already so thoroughly infiltrated their project that the net effect is that they would not notice the increased threat, but they would become survivable.

The current state of Israel, largely or entirely directed by a corporate framework which is very different from Zionism, is a product and tool of the melting pot. The only thing useful which has developed within it is an isolated worldview, something which so far has only led it to being led around like a goat by people and groups which see it as useful for their projects.

Two very interesting videos that are closely related

Notice in this video, the character on the left 

Now look at the character on the right here 

The interesting thing is that there is a progression of roles.

If you start with the character in the first video, then go to the second video, that is one step.

Zionists believe there are only two steps. From the marionette to the evangelical, then to Zionists.

Melting pot strategists would say there are four, but don't tell the Zionists.

Anybody who has more sense says there are at least five.

The evangelical has more power than the marionette.

The Zionists have more power than the evangelicals.

On and on.

Notice the evangelical's lineage on this page, 

And backtrack to the son of the daughter of the last male Neanderthal.



In Progress 

A goldmine for psychoanalysts