Engineering of the monster
Epsteinism is not merely a linguistic metaphor derived from the name of Jeffrey Epstein, who is linked to Israel, but a description of an entire structure of moral and political decay when crime turns into an instrument of influence, blackmail into a protection network, and power into a means of redefining truth itself. In the global consciousness, Epstein was not just an accused of horrific sexual crimes, but a symbol of a world where power mixes with money, blackmail, and influential relations, where the implicated systems can hide ugliness behind the facades of influence and public discourse. Hence, “Epsteinism” does not seem to be just a brutal moral deviation, but a model for a structure capable of reproducing crime within an entire political and media system, so that influence becomes a tool for managing public perception, not only to hide the truth but to remanufacture it as well.
Here lies the danger of the Israeli model: the issue is not only about committing massacres or justifying them, but about building an entire discursive system that re-engineers global perception so that the Palestinian, despite being the direct victim of occupation, siege, and killing, is placed under permanent accusation.
But what is more dangerous is that this model is not satisfied with lying, but tries to monopolize the definition of truth itself; meaning, the monopoly of who is human, who is a terrorist, who deserves life, and who is allowed to die without empathy or accountability. Here, propaganda turns from a mere media tool into an epistemological authority that attempts to control and reshape global consciousness.
Monopoly of truth
Israel, within this perception, is not content with practicing physical violence, but practices epistemological violence as well; as it seeks to monopolize the definition of terrorism, monopolize the definition of the victim, and monopolize the moral meaning itself. It commits acts that the world sees as a flagrant violation of law and humanity, then returns to present itself as a representative of Western values, morality, and democracy. Here, projection turns from a mere propaganda tool into an entire political doctrine: accusing the Palestinian of what the Israeli establishment itself practices of mass killing, starvation, siege, and systematic destruction. The problem here is not in the lie alone, but in turning the lie into a governance structure, and into a tool for managing the world morally and media-wise, so that power becomes capable of redefining crime as self-defense, and redefining genocide as a security or civilizational necessity.
Epsteinism here is not just a linguistic metaphor derived from the name of Epstein, linked to networks of influence, blackmail, and complex relations about whose intersections with influential Israeli and Western circles much has been raised, but a description of an entire structure of moral and political decay when crime turns into an instrument of influence, blackmail into a protection network, and power into a means of redefining truth itself. Epstein was not in the global consciousness just an accused of horrific sexual crimes, but a symbol of a world where power mixes with money, security apparatuses, blackmail, and cross-legal relations, where the implicated systems can hide the most forms of ugliness behind the facades of influence and public discourse wrapped in false “civilizational” values.
Genocide and narrative
In this sense, “Epsteinism” appears to be a planned method and a political and media pattern based on practicing the ugliest forms of violence and filth, then reproducing them narratively in an inverted manner through power, blackmail, or both together; meaning, turning the executioner into a victim, and the victim into an accused.
Here lies the danger of the Israeli model; the issue is not only about committing massacres or justifying them, but about building a global discursive system that re-engineers perception itself, so that the Palestinian, despite being the direct victim of occupation, siege, killing, and starvation, is placed under permanent moral and political accusation. Israel does not face the Palestinian as a political opponent only, but works to produce him symbolically as a dehumanized being, because every colonial project first needs to strip its victim of its humanity before proceeding to crush it physically.
Israel, within this perception, is not content with practicing physical violence, but also practices systematic epistemological violence; as it seeks to monopolize the definition of terrorism, monopolize the definition of the victim, and even monopolize the moral meaning itself. It commits acts that the free world sees as a flagrant violation of international law and human conscience, then returns to present itself as a representative of civilization, Western values, and democracy. Here, projection turns from a mere propaganda tool into an integrated doctrine: accusing the Palestinian of what the Israeli establishment itself practices of mass killing, starvation, siege, systematic destruction, and moral degradation, and even holding the victim responsible for the tragedy balance upon them. The most dangerous form of projection is not to accuse the other of what you do, but to need to invent an external “monster” in order to hide the monster latent in your deep structure, and to justify the continuation of your violence before yourself and before the world.
The most dangerous thing in “Epsteinism” is not the lie itself, but the ability to produce an international environment in which the falsification of consciousness becomes more influential than the truth itself; where media, political, and economic power is used to reshape global perception, not only to hide the crime, but to turn it into a narrative of moral defense, as if possessing influence gives the right to redefine reality, humanity, and meaning.
In the first weeks of the war of genocide on Gaza, Israel pushed a massive propaganda machine to describe Palestinians as “human monsters”, “animals”, “rapists”, and a bloodthirsty entity, in an attempt to strip them of their humanity morally before the world, and to provide psychological and political cover for any level of subsequent killing and destruction. The Israeli discourse then was not just a war discourse, but a comprehensive demonization process aimed at creating a savage image of the Palestinian, so that his killing, starvation, or the crushing of his cities becomes an act that can be implicitly justified within Western consciousness, and even turning genocide itself into an act that seems as if it is a defense of civilization or of the “free world.” This process relied on a massive pumping of false stories, emotional amplification, and intensive investment in the fears that formed in Western consciousness, in one of the most intense operations of manufacturing collective perception in modern times.
Rebound of the narrative
But what happened in reality formed one of the most flagrant moments of historical exposure; as major international newspapers, media, and human rights organizations began to back track on many of the stories and accusations that were pumped in the first days about the Palestinians, and even falsified the Israeli narrative itself, after the story collided with field facts, pictures, testimonies, and independent reports. While the propaganda machine continued to produce the discourse of “Palestinian barbarism”, the real pictures of Gaza were broadcast daily before the world: entire neighborhoods erased, tens of thousands of civilians killed, children pulled from under the rubble, hospitals, universities, schools, camps, and shelter centers systematically targeted, collective starvation, a suffocating siege, and comprehensive punishment for a besieged population, and horrific testimonies about killing, rape, torture, and humiliation. With the accumulation of scenes, it seemed as if reality itself began to demolish the Israeli narrative stone by stone, and reveal that what happened was an exposure of naked colonial violence that lost its ability to hide itself.
What is more dangerous is that Israel did not only fall into a propaganda contradiction, but fell into a complete moral, political, and legal scandal; as the flagrancy of its lies appeared to the world in what it described the Palestinians with, and indeed many of the testimonies by Israeli captives spoke about high levels of humane and moral treatment they received from Palestinians despite the conditions of war, siege, and bombardment, at the time when Israel was practicing, in the sight of all humanity, the same crimes and brutality that it attached to the Palestinians. Here, the scene appeared as if Israel was not describing the Palestinian as much as it was revealing its own deep image; meaning that it practiced a complete process of projection, in which it accuses the victim of what the executioner stores in his psychological, political, and military structure. It is as if Israel was fighting a war against its image reflected in the mirror; for every accusation it attached to the Palestinians returned to appear in its own behavior in a more violent, organized, and brutal manner.
While the discourse of “Palestinian barbarism” was raised to justify the war, scenes of brutal killing, comprehensive destruction, shocking violations against prisoners and detainees, and increasing reports of torture, humiliation, sexual violations, rape, and killing inside prisons and detention centers gradually unfolded, as well as policies of collective starvation, targeting medical staff and journalists, and turning the entire civilian life into an open military target. Here, the issue was no longer just false propaganda, but turned into a case of almost complete political and moral projection: accusing the victim of what the executioner does, then committing that in a more extensive, brutal, and documented manner, to a degree that it appeared that Israel was building from the beginning a preemptive discourse to justify the crimes it was preparing to commit.
Fall of the mask
With the passage of time, not only the fragility of the Israeli narrative was exposed, but also the deep structure of violence latent behind it was exposed; as the world saw, in an unprecedented way, how a state that claims to defend “values and civilization” can practice this amount of filth, genocide of a people, destruction, killing, starvation, and human elimination, then continue to address the world in the language of morality and civility. Thus, Israeli propaganda rebounded upon itself in an amazing way; for instead of proving the “brutality of the Palestinian”, it ended up revealing the structural brutality latent in the Israeli war machine and discourse itself, at a historical moment when the exposure appeared greater than the ability of the narrative to cover or deny, and even greater than the ability of power itself to monopolize truth or control global consciousness as used to happen for long decades.
Perhaps the danger of this historical moment lies not in the magnitude of the crime alone, but in the fall of the mask; as the world no longer sees only what Israel does, but how power, when allied with fear, propaganda, and influence, can attempt to redefine truth itself.
In the end, perhaps the most important question after the fall of the mask is: is the exposure of brutality enough to bring down the monster itself? It is true that history is not governed by morality alone, but by balances of power, interests, and international structures that have often protected colonialism and reproduced it. Nevertheless, the most dangerous thing that can afflict any colonial project is not military defeat only, but its loss of its ability to convince the world of its moral legitimacy. When the mask falls in this flagrant way, that may not mean the end of the monster immediately, but it may be the strongest warning of the beginning of its historical eclipse; because colonialism can live long by force, but it cannot survive forever after its reality is exposed before the global human consciousness.
