This is the legacy of a country that never denazified, but still falls in line with Western hegemony regarding the imperialist project of Israel. They have found a new victim to foist their racist paranoia unto and simultaneously use the widespread opposition among Muslims and Arabs to Israel (a state that ethnically cleanses and exterminates them) as means to justify their extermination because their opposition to the Israel is systemically and legally classified as antisemitic.
This is the obvious consequence of labeling valid criticism of Israel as rote antisemitism is fueling anti-Muslim villainization and hysteria. If you oppose Arab extermination and ethnic cleansing, you are antisemitic. And if you're antisemitic you deserve extermination.
One thing I think is missing from your analysis is the fact that Jews have existed in what is now Israel since before Zionism existed as a colonial project. In fact it wasn't until after the Nakba that the identities of "Arab/Palestinian" and "Jewish" were considered to somehow be at odds. Indigenous Jewish Arab groups lived well throughout Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine right up until the mid-20th century, when the conflict between Israel and the larger Arab world forced a lot of people in those groups to have to pick between their identities.
Zionism is inherently the product of European colonialism, in that a persecuted minority within a colonial empire knew of no other strategy of liberation than to be granted a colony of their own, and the ruling class of that empire was only too happy to use their plight to further their own geopolitical ends.
No leftist should be opposed to Jewish people living in greater Palestine; they've always been there. But we should oppose Zionism as an explicitly racist, colonial ideology that seeks to create a false division between "Jews" and "Arabs" for the benefit of capitalist empire and mostly-white settlers from mostly Europe and America.
Excellent points, comrade o7
I think you have a national bourgeoisie forming after the formation of the state with a material interest in apartheid and disenfranchisement to develop the internal capitalist economy through arms industry and real estate/ construction coming tangential with the interests of European and US imperial interests in the region.
I think in the conflict the principal contradiction is related to the national bourgeoisie (and presumably petite bourgeoisie, taking over services and business etc. hence the fascist elements. there is clearly a class collaborationist element here.) Imperialism could become the principal contradiction if there was as situation whereby the Palestinian population became enfranchised enough to seriously impede Israel being used as a base for imperialist operations, but it is possible to have a largely woke liberal multicultural state that would still materially benefit from imperialist assuming the superstructural aspects of arab nationalist etc. didn't overshadow the material motivations for imperial patronage.
or something along those lines.
It's hard to separate the Palestinian population from anti-imperialism at this point, though, given that they've been some of the most visible victims of imperialism of the last 70 years at least. It's why the American / Israeli / W. European governments are so opposed to a one-state solution with full Palestinian enfranchisement.
If the Palestinian population is fully enfranchised, and if the systemic apartheid against Mizrahi and Arab Israelis is ended, I'd bet big money that Israel's stance toward the U.S. and Europe would do a 180.
I agree, I'm just saying that the principal contradiction that maintains the occupation is domestic. There is no doubt that imperialism plays a big role.
It's maybe 6 of one half dozen of the other though to be fair.