These posts explore the themes developed in my monograph, Narcisso-Fascism, which is itself a real-world test of the central concepts of the Biocognitive Model of Mind for psychiatry.
The "Dream of Zion" map you link to has an explanation:
"This map first appeared in an English-language edition of the fraudulent "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" - the infamous blood libel against the Jewish people - published in Iran in 1985. Ibid. This version appears in a new edition, "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," attributed to "The Representatives of Zion, of the 33rd Degree" and published in Kuwait by the "Scientific Research House." The estimated publication date is 2018. The current version of the map varies only slightly from that of 1985 illustrated in Pipes: the words "Symbol of Jewry" have been added in script beneath the legend "Freemasons Eye," and a partially legible signature ("Mir"?) appears at the lower right."
This link also shows that Netanyahu's recent presentation to UN GA used a map with all current Palestinian land incorporated in Israel, as well as illegally annexed Golan Heights and a few other bits.
Don't fall into the genetic fallacy. The provenance of the map is irrelevant; all that counts is whether it is a valid statement of Zionist intent and, as far as I know, it is.
In particular, why does Israel keep encroaching on Palestinian/Arab land? Hasbara says: "Israel must protect itself against hostile neighbours." Wrong. Israel CREATES its hostile neighbours. The essence of the principle behind Narcisso-Fascism is that humans are genetically programmed to try to dominate each other. They don't have to, they can live without it and most do but the thrill of domination is too exciting for some. The other side of that principle is that humans will fight to resist domination. That too is genetically determined. If somebody were doing to your family what Israel has been doing to its neighbours since inception, you too would fight.
Fascism feeds on itself, it only goes one way, it ratchets up, never down, fascists never give up voluntarily. It can only be burned out of the national psyche. It will happen but I think it will happen from inside.
The "justification" for Israel's permanent drive to expropriate and depopulate Palestinian land appears to be Deuteronomy 11:24
'Every place on which the sole of your foot treads shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river Euphrates, even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be.'
Note that Deut. 11:23 says "… ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves. " The US, by any chance?
Here is a set of guidelines for sentient life that I conceived now and do endorse. I have crafted these carefully but may edit later.
1. Every sentient person has the inalienable rights to live a full and fulfilling life according to their capacity, and supported with the resources, care, and attention required to fulfill that capacity.
2. Every sentient person does not have the inherent right to reproduce, other than in accordance with, or eugenic endorsement of, (1) and the scientific pre-assurance and ongoing assurance of ecologically sustainable practices.
3. Every sentient person has the inalienable responsibilities to embrace, support, and foster the sustainment of (1) and (2), according to their capacity.
4. The quality of life of any sentient person can be, but should never be, at the exploitation of another, although in a case of finite and limited resources, a fair compromise may be necessary in conjunction with a fair endorsement of (2).
5. (status quo law) The human species has the most responsibilities because (at least collectively) it also has the most rights and privileges, and the most abilities (tools, social co-ordination, wisdom and intelligence) to enact moral or immoral states upon the world.
6. The evolution of nature is an amoral paradigm that can facilitate but does not guarantee any states of sustained morality. (Optional reference: wildanimalsuffering.org . Related concept: "appeal to nature" fallacy.)
7. (status quo law) However, the evolution of human civilization is also largely an amoral paradigm with the capacity to be a moral one.
NOTES - The concepts of "freedom" and "power" are always subject to the guidelines above. Selective freedom and selective power are not, and should never be, absolute in a finite world.
Thanks for replying. I am currently considering whether my set of guidelines accounts for community values, or whether it does not need to.
In regards to your stated premise, there are relatively few sentient beings/persons who can actually ensure that. I mentioned how the human species collectively has the privilege and best opportunity, and then of course there are those with more responsibility and power. Hence, my point (3) covers your premise but with the proviso of "according to their capacity", since capacity is formulated and governed by various things including moral agency, education status, official roles, etc.
Mr. Mclaren, I was with you until you referred us to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Very disappointing.
Where did I refer to that forgery?
The "Dream of Zion" map you link to has an explanation:
"This map first appeared in an English-language edition of the fraudulent "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" - the infamous blood libel against the Jewish people - published in Iran in 1985. Ibid. This version appears in a new edition, "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," attributed to "The Representatives of Zion, of the 33rd Degree" and published in Kuwait by the "Scientific Research House." The estimated publication date is 2018. The current version of the map varies only slightly from that of 1985 illustrated in Pipes: the words "Symbol of Jewry" have been added in script beneath the legend "Freemasons Eye," and a partially legible signature ("Mir"?) appears at the lower right."
The document known as "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" was created by Tsarist secret police and published in 1903. See Wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion
The map was just one I picked up. There are numerous versions available. Try this, atrributed to none other than Theordore Herzl:
https://www.middleeasteye.net/explainers/what-greater-israel
This link also shows that Netanyahu's recent presentation to UN GA used a map with all current Palestinian land incorporated in Israel, as well as illegally annexed Golan Heights and a few other bits.
First published in 1903, and revised and updated frequently, particularly in the Arab middle east.
The Jews have an old saying: "If a man wants to beat a dog, he will always find a stick to do it with."
Thanks for your time.
Don't fall into the genetic fallacy. The provenance of the map is irrelevant; all that counts is whether it is a valid statement of Zionist intent and, as far as I know, it is.
In particular, why does Israel keep encroaching on Palestinian/Arab land? Hasbara says: "Israel must protect itself against hostile neighbours." Wrong. Israel CREATES its hostile neighbours. The essence of the principle behind Narcisso-Fascism is that humans are genetically programmed to try to dominate each other. They don't have to, they can live without it and most do but the thrill of domination is too exciting for some. The other side of that principle is that humans will fight to resist domination. That too is genetically determined. If somebody were doing to your family what Israel has been doing to its neighbours since inception, you too would fight.
Fascism feeds on itself, it only goes one way, it ratchets up, never down, fascists never give up voluntarily. It can only be burned out of the national psyche. It will happen but I think it will happen from inside.
The "justification" for Israel's permanent drive to expropriate and depopulate Palestinian land appears to be Deuteronomy 11:24
'Every place on which the sole of your foot treads shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river Euphrates, even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be.'
Note that Deut. 11:23 says "… ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves. " The US, by any chance?
Thanks for this writing.
Here is a set of guidelines for sentient life that I conceived now and do endorse. I have crafted these carefully but may edit later.
1. Every sentient person has the inalienable rights to live a full and fulfilling life according to their capacity, and supported with the resources, care, and attention required to fulfill that capacity.
2. Every sentient person does not have the inherent right to reproduce, other than in accordance with, or eugenic endorsement of, (1) and the scientific pre-assurance and ongoing assurance of ecologically sustainable practices.
3. Every sentient person has the inalienable responsibilities to embrace, support, and foster the sustainment of (1) and (2), according to their capacity.
4. The quality of life of any sentient person can be, but should never be, at the exploitation of another, although in a case of finite and limited resources, a fair compromise may be necessary in conjunction with a fair endorsement of (2).
5. (status quo law) The human species has the most responsibilities because (at least collectively) it also has the most rights and privileges, and the most abilities (tools, social co-ordination, wisdom and intelligence) to enact moral or immoral states upon the world.
6. The evolution of nature is an amoral paradigm that can facilitate but does not guarantee any states of sustained morality. (Optional reference: wildanimalsuffering.org . Related concept: "appeal to nature" fallacy.)
7. (status quo law) However, the evolution of human civilization is also largely an amoral paradigm with the capacity to be a moral one.
NOTES - The concepts of "freedom" and "power" are always subject to the guidelines above. Selective freedom and selective power are not, and should never be, absolute in a finite world.
There's one premise missing, which precedes these: Every sentient being has the ineluctable duty to ensure the safety and stability of the biosphere.
Thanks for replying. I am currently considering whether my set of guidelines accounts for community values, or whether it does not need to.
In regards to your stated premise, there are relatively few sentient beings/persons who can actually ensure that. I mentioned how the human species collectively has the privilege and best opportunity, and then of course there are those with more responsibility and power. Hence, my point (3) covers your premise but with the proviso of "according to their capacity", since capacity is formulated and governed by various things including moral agency, education status, official roles, etc.