The Gaza War Is Shattering “Israeli” Narcissism
Dr Rida Al-Shab, Al-Akhbar Newspaper
The day before October 7 is not the same as the day after. The Al-Aqsa Flood Operation killed the “Israeli” security doctrine. This prompted “Israel” to move from containment when dealing with the resistance in both Palestine and Lebanon to a battlefield approach under the slogan, “The War of No Choice.”
This is the narrative that the “Israeli” media is peddling both at home and abroad. The objective is to try and justify the genocidal behavior in Gaza and the mounting human and economic costs on the way to achieving the war’s declared goals: retrieving the captives, breaking the back of the resistance in Gaza and the West Bank, stifling the internal Arabs voices, changing the political reality in the post-war Gaza Strip, and imposing changes on the map to the military positions of the Lebanese resistance along the areas adjacent to the settlements surrounding the occupied Galilee.
The political and security establishment in Tel Aviv and “Israeli” elites have always linked their genocidal behavior to behavioral psychology and its American founder, John Watson.
They’ve attempted to justify acts of genocide in Gaza by citing the famous behavioral current theory – for every stimulus there is a response. The brutal response is the crazy war on Gaza, and the stimulus is October 7th, marked on the ground with the signature of the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas.
Here lies the crux of the matter. It is true that the behavioral trend in psychology says the following: “Every stimulus has a response.” But it links that response to a motive. Individuals can change abnormal responses or establish them through motives. For example, not every poor person (stimulus) is a legitimate thief (response). Responses to the stimulus itself vary among people with different motives.
Based on this, the inherent aggressive “Israeli” behaviors must be explained by linking them to the underlying motives, so that it is possible to understand the true motives driving the occupiers’ subconscious. Successive governments have worked, and are still working, to consolidate these motives in the process of creating a superior racist subconscious.
It started with the year of the Nakba that sought to bring the Jews from the ends of the world to the “Promised Land,” and stretched on to facilitate settler concentrations on occupied land in the midst of a hostile Arab environment.
In the process of scientific dissection of motives, the “Israelis” relied on the works of mass psychologist Gustave Le Bon and psychologist Abraham Maslow, both of whom formulated a coherent system through which they explained the nature of the motives or needs that move and shape human behavior.
With a simplified explanation of the summary of the theories of the two psychologists, we come to the conclusion that the person who has the profession of influencing the masses must create their motives through his practice of linking the needs of individuals [material, moral] and social identity [Land: Promised, Language: Hebrew, Belief: Jewish], which is what “Israel’s” rulers and elites have been practicing on the Jewish and Arab populations since 1948. They worked to magnify the identity of the Jews in “Israel” to the point where the racist settlers began to see themselves as human beings while the Arabs, regardless of their race, homeland, and sects, were portrayed as beasts and animals.
This is exactly how “Israel’s” minister of war, Yoav Galant, later described the people of Gaza in the ongoing war of extermination. In more than one media appearance, Palestinians were referred to as "animals in human form."
Hence, in the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation, Hamas won by marginalizing “Israel’s” narcissism when it comes to security, morality, technology, the economy, and scientific superiority.
Years earlier, Hezbollah did the same thing when it destroyed the term “invincible army”. This scatters the keys to the masses’ code that the enemy bragged about possessing for many years in the battle to control the collective “Israeli” and Arab subconscious.
So how can “animals outperform humans”? “Israel” tore itself apart on the popular, military, and political levels trying to answer this question. Discussions grew internally about the imminent beginning of the end of the entity and about a dream from which the time has come to wake up. When the doctrine of influence falls, countries, entities, and organizations fall with it.
This is the magnitude of the danger facing “Israel”. This is why the internal consensus of war has been understood. The responsive and aggressive behavior here is driven by the motive, the motive to destroy and annihilate the Palestinian, Lebanese, Yemeni, Iraqi, and Syrian peoples and their resistance, which have succeeded in deflating the swollen “Israeli” narcissism and revealed the truth about the troubled settlers. This is a war of no choice – either a great victory will restore the remnants of an artificial narcissism, or the clock ticks down to the entity’s demise.
Comments
