Bardem and the bad Jewess

Javier Bardem wears a badge reading "Palestine" and an anti-war symbol on the red carpet as he arrives at the 98th edition of the Academy Awards in Hollywood, Los Angeles, California (USA), on March 15, 2026. REUTERS/Daniel Cole At what moment of strange unconsciousness did we accept that the Bardems and the Sarandons of the day would decide what can be thought and what can be opined? When did we allow the fashionable groupies in the style of Swifties Against Genocide to become the new inquisition of thought? What delusion led us to believe that any random Macklemore was a qualified expert in geopolitics? What broken ethical compass made us suppose that all of these were the guardians of ideological morality? A new Stasi of ideas is being created that has appointed itself the universal censor of freedom of expression. A Stasi that lives outside the rules of the game we have imposed on ourselves as a civilization, indifferent to the laws that mark the limits of the democratic game. Of course, that whole swarm of lesser gods agrees on two basic principles. The first: professing the new religion of Palestinism, whose faith obligates practicing pure hatred against the Hebrew state, without nuance or euphemism. And the second: denying that they are the main culprits behind the Judeophobic hatred that runs rampant across the viral landscape without any sense or control. Of course, they all repeat the old litany of the "Jewish friend" that prevents them from being antisemitic, because their thing is anti-Zionism and blah, blah, blah. Which is a contradictio in terminis, because being anti-Zionist is denying Israel's right to exist, that is, denying the Jewish people, subjected to secular persecution and a massive attempt at extermination, the possibility of having a shield to defend them. Don't let them sell us rotten fish: turning Israel into the mother of all evils, focusing all the world's conflicts on a single one, denying Israel's reasons to defend itself and trivializing the atrocities of terrorism has only one old, well-known and lethal name: antisemitism. As a metaphor, the aberrant example of the Spanish government, which refuses to share a stage with Israel at the Eurovision music festival, but feels happy in Iran's company at the soccer World Cup. Denying the antisemitism of all these practices is a monumental mockery that doesn't withstand a second of reflection. One only needs to observe how attacks against Jews have increased around the world to understand where the source that feeds the hatred comes from. However, everything that is happening does not stop at antisemitism, because the censorship and boycott against certain public figures is not only because of their Jewish condition, which is very relevant, but because of the ideas they defend, beyond their identity. That is why some of us who are not Jewish suffer the same boycott. In other words, they are not only Jewish, but are perceived as "bad Jews," and that is where the world divides between the Naza director Yuval Abraham and the singer Pink. That is, between the good Jew who makes a film against the Israeli army and defends the theses of the anti-Israeli gurus, and the bad Jew who recalls the drama of October 7 and censures the denialism of Free Palestine. The case of the Argentine writer Ariana Harwicz is especially significant. Although her Jewish condition, expressed without complexes or veils, weighs when taking sides in these Manichean and deranged times, the truth is that she was pursued not for being Jewish, but for being a "bad Jew." If Harwicz had bought into the "genocide" theses and her statements had passed the filter of "Bardenism" (Bardem creates a school), she would have been presented with ovations and the 25 minutes of applause for Naza in Venice would have fallen short. But Harwicz had her own opinion, had spoken out against the cultural boycott of Israel, and her statements were immediately classified as "justification of genocide," once the concept of genocide has been imposed and placed beyond all debate. This is the point: Harwicz was thinking freely about the conflict, and it is forbidden to have any opinion other than the one imposed by the gurus of censorship. By the way, on this point, may shame fall forever on Camila Sosa Villada and the rest of Ariana Harwicz's compatriots who have defended the boycott. The Bardem school, that is, "Bardenism," does not pursue Jews in general. For that there are already the thousands of brainless ones whose mental diarrhea spreads through social networks, universities, soccer stadiums, political speeches and so many other dark corners. What Bardenism pursues is the freedom to think, to question oneself and to reach conclusions that do not fit with the imposed single thought. The process for defeating free thought is precise and meticulous: first, all complexity is denied to the conflict. With the situation simplified and vulgarized, a closed conclusion is imposed that admits no discussion: the war is not a war, it is a genocide. And with the capital-letter words imposed everywhere, without evidence, or verdicts, or anything to support it, whoever does not accept the conclusion as an immovable faith is pursued. Harwicz and Pink and many others have had the Star of David placed on their arm not only for being Jewish —which is already a plus— but for not becoming informers against the state that was born to defend them. The public Jew, the Pinks and the Harwiczes, are forced to speak out against Israel, as a penance to atone for their Jewishness. The domesticated Jew is the only good Jew. But if that same Jew speaks of October 7, of terrorism, of the right to self-defense, of the antisemitism they suffer, and raises their own voice against the imposed thought, then they are the bad Jew: a marked one, a plague-bearer, an outcast. Javier Bardem, Susan Sarandon, the wise Macklemore, the noisy Swifties Against Genocide, are the new thought police, heirs of all the inquisitors of all times who tried to kill the right to think, to dissent and to dare to express it. They sell themselves as charitable souls, but they are vulgar censors, so cowardly that they need to impose, pursue and point fingers before admitting debate. They are simply what they appear to be: a religious police attached to the new faith of Palestinism. @RaholaOficialWeb: https://pilarrahola.com Instagram: pilar_rahola/