The clock is ticking. One finds the shadow of Hemingway lurking with a query: “For whom the bell tolls?” The victim most likely seems to be Iran and, akin to previous afflictions, the perpetrators will yet again be the same: the US and its protégé (the Zionist state of Israel). Zionism is incognito Jewish nationalism, or Jewish capitalism should one wish to be more precise. Akin to any other nationalism, the Jewish variety is not devoid of a fascist tinge, which regards the conservation of traditional Judaism more important than the elevation and emancipation of the Jewish individual. Zionism, while proclaiming the doctrine of historical rights, denies the right of self-determination of nations, a bourgeois right that under ordinary circumstances commands tremendous reverence and sublime importance in the capitalist world. From the very outset, Zionism was a reactionary movement since it based its claim to the boundaries of a state that ceased to exist some 2,500 years ago, along with the peculiar social circumstances that necessitated its existence at that point in time. It is fascinating to observe how the once bête noire, the despised and detested ‘race’, which takes pride in its ‘purity’ — if one is prepared to buy either of these myths — has turned into a blue-eyed nation by aligning itself with imperialism, which, during WWII, allowed it to be besieged and bludgeoned by its counterpart and, beside verbal commiseration, refused to provide any respite to this wretched sect of humanity. To begin with, the very concept of race is grotesque. Based on scientific theories, it can be assumed that human life originated uniformly on planet Earth since like causes under like circumstances are likely to produce like results. However, diverse qualities/traits developed in the human species over a long period of time; these changes were driven by their unique social/environmental conditions. For example, the people in Europe lost their skin pigmentation due to extremely cold weather and prolonged sunlight deprivation, whereas the natural conditions were the other way around in Asia and Africa, thereby resulting in darker complexions. As human beings, we do not owe credit, or discredit for that matter, for these changes. On this subject, Darwin states: “Our naturalist would likewise be much disturbed as soon as he should discern that the distinctive traits of man are extremely variable…We may doubt whether any trait may be adduced that is distinctive and constant for a certain race…The form of the skull varies considerably in certain races; likewise every other trait…The races of man graduate into each other, independently, in many cases, as far as we can judge, of their having intercrossed. Man has been studied more thoroughly than any other organic being, and yet there is the greatest possible diversity amongst capable judges whether he should be classed as a single species or race, or as two (Virey), as three (Jacquinot), as four (Rant), five (Blumenbach), six (Buffon), seven (Hunter), eight (Agassiz), 11 (Dickering), 15 (Bory St. Vincent), 16 (Desmoulins), 22 (Morton), 60 (Crawfurd), or 63 (Burke).” Professor Felix von Luschan, who rejected the idea of ‘scientific racism’, said: “We have thus three chief varieties of mankind: the old Indo-European, the African, and the East-Asiatic, all branching off from the same primitive stock, diverging from each other for thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of years, but all these forming a complete unity, intermarrying in all directions without the slightest decrease in fertility.” He further elaborated, “From these three varieties came all the different types of modern mankind, generally by local isolation. A very interesting example of such mutation is found in the earliest known inhabitants of Western Asia. This is the land of those extremely narrow and high-arched noses we generally call Jewish or even Semitic. These remarkable noses, however, do not belong to the Semitic invaders, of whom Abraham is the eponymic hero, but to the pre-Semitic population, which might be called Hittite or Armenoid, as the modern Armenians are their direct descendants.” As far as the myth of pure breed is concerned, Jews, like any other people, cannot claim to be having this specification. As described by Stade, “In addition to Canaanitic, Hebraic, Arabic components, individuals of Aramaic and Egyptian origin were also absorbed by them.” In his book History of the People of Israel, Bernhard Stade states, “In the history of Jewish nation nothing excites our attention or stir us to admiration…how slight was the effort the Israelis made to be exclusive is apparent from the circumstance that we meet with an Ishmaelite in David’s family. In addition, the ancient Israelites were distinctly surprised by the timidity with which the ancient Egyptians guarded themselves against any contact with foreigners. Of course, this does not mean that the Jews did not prize their own nationality and the purity of their Israelitic origin. But since such purity was surely quite unusual in the oldest period, its absence was not considered a blemish. This makes it easy for us to understand that while, according to the most ancient form of the legend, Isaac, the son of promise, was to have married a woman of his kindred, it is narrated without apparent surprise that other fathers marry foreign women: Judah, a Canaanitic woman; Joseph, an Egyptian woman.” According to Karl Kautsky, “The firm and tangible symbol of the Jews’ community was not the philosophy of religion, but the religious ceremonial; this it was that served the Jews of all the regions then involved in world traffic as the bond recognised and recognisable by all. And simultaneously as a means of keeping outsiders out…In Freemasonry, we find a similar rich development of ceremonials…But every stranger was welcome who would recognise this rite — without regard to origin. Jewish exclusiveness was not an exclusiveness of race. The Jewish propaganda in all the regions of the ancient world was rather calculated to stimulate tremendously the mingling of races within Judaism.” For the preservation of a pure race, a complete denial of women’s rights is a precondition. An emancipated free woman demands the liberty of sexual life. Any such freedom is liable to contaminate the race. Jews had been brutally victimised by several nations. Their women had to undergo intense physical and emotional torture including sexual molestation. Those generations born as a result of sexual abuse were owned by the community as such. According to Karl Kautsky, “In Spain, for example, in the 14th and 15th centuries, hundreds of thousands of Jews were converted to Christianity. Their posterity infected the Aryan race with their blood. There is no Jew today who can say to himself with certainty that he has not a drop of non-Jewish blood in his veins, if only for the reason that there never has existed a Jewish race either in the sense of a pure breed of domestic animals or in the other sense, that of a geographical race…persecutions of the Jews alone would be sufficient to preclude the possibility of an immutable ‘purity’ of Jewish blood during the last two thousand years.” (To be continued) The writer is based in Australia and has authored books on socialism and history. He can be reached at saulatnagi@hotmail.com