Kant...Shmant!

Submitted by Roque (Mexico), Sep 2, 2010 at 00:29

It's hard for one to critique anyone who can quote Kant. Anyhow, without having read Kant and only knowing that he's one of history's greatest philosophers, I can't imagine that he would propose anything like the EU. The EU is too full of contradictions to be a model of anything at all.

The funny thing is, so-called multinational states were the norm in Europe before the Great War. See where that got them. Now they're turing the ideas of Zionism as Jewish nationalism against Jewish nationalists because suddenly nationalism is an extreme holdover of violent a violent tribal past. That's not because Europe has solved any problems. They just carried out their own ethnic cleansing by now and see any latecomers as being behing the times. Or whatever.

This shows that the so-called paridigm shift described here isn't really accurate. The shift of the so-called thinking classes towards hositility towards Israel is better explained as another blood-for-oil deal (see Eurabia). I believe the Eurabia to a point but beyond that, it's true that this hostility existed before the '73 OPEC boycott, which supposedly begins the "paradigm shift." My own pet hypothesis is that the paradigm began to shift in the late '50s, when Lenin's accomodation of nationalist movements in the colonies as "national liberation movements" was taken up by the Kremlin leadership.

Once Arafat could register the PLO as a "national liberation movement" under Brezhnev, Israel's fate was cast, insofar as the so-called thinking classes. Even the fall of Communism can't stop them from believing in third-world national liberation movements as the motor that will take humanity to development in full plentitude, etc etc.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".