Today, there is an extraordinary global habit in which millions who would never dream of questioning Japan, Brazil, or Belgium casually gather to debate whether the Jewish state should continue existing at all.

There are few propositions in modern political discourse more absurd than the idea that Israel does not have a right to exist. Yet this idea now floats through universities, media panels, and activist circles. Suggest abolishing Belgium and people assume you are clinically unwell. Suggest abolishing Israel and suddenly you are considered “critically engaged.”

And whenever this insanity is challenged, its proponents immediately reach for the same emergency flotation device: “Well, no country has an inherent right to exist.”

The remarkable thing, of course, is that this grand principle somehow materializes only in discussions about the Jewish state. Nobody spends their weekends debating whether Peru should continue existing. Nobody hosts student encampments demanding the dismantling of Denmark. Canada does not wake up each morning to discover protesters chanting for its annihilation between oat-milk lattes and diversity seminars.

We are told, with immense moral seriousness, that Jews have a right to exist, just not as a sovereign people in their ancestral homeland. Which is rather like telling someone they have every right to live, just preferably not in their own house. The modern world’s message to the Jews increasingly sounds like this: you may survive anywhere, provided it is nervously, temporarily, and always at somebody else’s discretion.

And this argument somehow passes for enlightened thought.

The truly astonishing part is how historically illiterate the entire proposition........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)