An on-line pundit grouped the Zionists with the REALLY bad guys - Russia, China and Islam. So he wrote: Right-wingers influenced by Dugin and the Chicago faction view current geopolitical disputes through a precarious dualism: the globalist and Zionist elite versus the "Axis of Resistance" - what remains of communism, Russian traditionalism, and the Islamic world.
Such a view is myopic and ideological because it sees - from a third-worldist Leninist perspective - globalism as cosmopolitan imperialism confronting oppressed ethnic and national resistances. What these people ignore is that China, Russia, and the Islamic world are themselves globalist and imperialist projects, and not some oppressed cultural and civilizational resistance!
There is no "Axis of Resistance," but rather three competing globalist projects: Western globalism (in its multiculturalist left-wing version and its Zionist neoconservative right-wing version), the Russo-Chinese communist-Eurasian or left-wing Traditionalist project, and revolutionary Islamism. These three blocs are the Enemies of the West.
The existential position of Western man is tragic: we are surrounded by enemies, both internally and externally. But in the end, it has always been the West against the rest.
---
1. Zionism is the Antithesis of Globalism
The original argument mislabels Zionism as a "neoconservative globalist" project. In reality, Zionism is the ultimate expression of national particularism. While globalism seeks to dissolve borders, standardize cultures, and erode national identities in favor of a technocratic elite, Zionism sought to restore a specific, ancient people to their specific, ancestral homeland.
Zionism is the successful conclusion of an anti-colonial struggle for indigenous rights. By labeling it "globalism," one ignores that Israel is one of the few nations in the West that still possesses a high birth rate, a strong national identity, and a profound sense of religious and historical continuity—the very things "Western man" supposedly laments losing. Israel is not a project of borderless "cosmopolitanism"; it is a project of rootedness.
2. The "Front Line" vs. The "Enemy Within"
The argument claims that "Western man" is surrounded by three competing globalisms. However, placing Israel in the same category as the Russo-Chinese axis or revolutionary Islamism is a tactical mistake. Israel is the Iron Wall protecting the West from the most expansionist of these forces: revolutionary Islamism.
If the West is truly in a "tragic" existential position, then Israel is its vanguard. The same forces that seek the destruction of Jerusalem—the Iranian regime and its proxies—openly chant "Death to America" and seek the subversion of Europe. By treating Zionism as an enemy, the Western traditionalist severs his own front line, leaving the Mediterranean and the soft underbelly of Europe exposed to the very forces the original text claims to fear.
3. The Moral and Civilizational Root
The "West" is not merely a geographic location or a racial category; it is a civilizational project built on the synthesis of Athens and Jerusalem. To excise the "Zionist" or Jewish element from the West is to hollow out the West’s own moral foundations.
While the text warns of "multiculturalist left-wing globalism," it fails to recognize that the modern state of Israel is one of the most potent bulwarks against that very ideology. In Israel, the "woke" deconstruction of the West is rejected in favor of a gritty, realistic commitment to survival, tradition, and national sovereignty. To the "Eurasianist" or the "Third-Worldist," Israel is hated precisely because it is a Western-style democracy that refuses to apologize for its existence.
4. The Fallacy of "The West Against the Rest"
The original text concludes with a nihilistic "West against the rest" isolationism. This "tragic" view is a self-fulfilling prophecy of defeat. The West’s strength has always come from its ability to form alliances based on shared values and strategic interests.
The "Axis of Resistance" (Iran, Russia, China) is indeed a real threat, but they are unified by a hatred of the Jewish [and Christian!!] world. They do not distinguish between the "Western man" in Paris and the "Zionist" in Tel Aviv; they see them as one and the same. To distance the West from Israel is not "cleansing" the West of an enemy; it is surrendering a crucial fortress to the very "external enemies" the author mentions.
Conclusion
The "Enemies of the West" are indeed real: they are the totalitarians in Beijing, the revanchists in Moscow, and the theocrats in Tehran. However, the Jewish state is the West’s most reliable ally in this struggle. Zionism is not a "globalist elite" project; it is the survival story of a people that serves as a blueprint for how any Western nation might reclaim its own identity, sovereignty, and will to live.
To turn against Israel is to succumb to the "Third-Worldist" and "Duginist" propaganda that the author claims to despise. If Western man is to survive his "tragic" position, he must recognize that the road to his restoration does not go through the abandonment of Jerusalem, but through a shared defense of the values that both the West and Israel represent.
