Netanyahu’s political future, the West Bank and Naomi Klein’s warning about “end-times” politics

A heated episode spanning Israel and global politics

This episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored opened with the show’s account of mounting political pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu and violence in the occupied West Bank. Morgan then hosted Ishai Fleischer, an adviser to Itamar Ben-Gvir who said he was standing for the Knesset, alongside British commentator Owen Jones. A separate interview with Naomi Klein explored arguments from her book End Times Fascism. The programme offered a contentious single-source conversation rather than an independently corroborated news report.

West Bank violence framed the political debate

Morgan cited an attack on Palestinian farmers and a Washington Post photographer, saying ten suspects had been arrested and that Israeli and US officials had condemned the incident. He linked rising settler violence to Netanyahu’s reliance on far-right coalition partners. Fleischer rejected any suggestion that violence against journalists formed part of Ben-Gvir’s agenda, describing his movement instead as one of “law and order” and opposition to jihadism.

Jones and Fleischer subsequently disputed Palestinian fatality figures for the West Bank. Jones said 1,244 Palestinians, including 268 children, had been killed by Israeli forces and settlers between 2023 and 2025. Fleischer cited a figure of nine deaths in 2025 attributed directly to settlers, while Morgan countered with a higher overall figure. The participants invoked different categories and time periods, and the transcript does not resolve the disagreement.

Fleischer pressed on territorial control and Palestinian rights

Asked what should happen in the West Bank and Gaza, Fleischer said Israel would control both territories and remove people he classified as jihadists. He declined to estimate how many Palestinians fell into that category, although he cited polling that he said showed roughly 80% support for the 7 October attack. When Morgan asked whether innocent people lived in Gaza, Fleischer answered that they did and said he had known and worked with Gazans personally.

Jones argued that Fleischer’s stated positions would deny equality and meaningful political representation to Palestinian citizens of Israel. Fleischer denied being racist, saying minorities could remain if they were loyal to the Jewish state. Their exchange deteriorated into personal insults and competing accusations of antisemitism, leaving little room for sustained examination of policy details.

Klein challenged narratives of inevitable catastrophe

Klein told Morgan that her “end-times” framework was not a prediction that the world must end. Rather, she said it examined religious and secular elites who treat catastrophe as inevitable while imagining that a chosen group will survive or profit. She presented proposed visions of a rebuilt “New Gaza” as a template in which destruction is followed by an exclusive, technologically advanced city, while stressing that this remained an idea rather than an existing place.

A dispute over when the word fascism applies

Morgan questioned whether describing present-day political and technology figures as fascists trivialised the crimes of twentieth-century regimes. Klein replied that fascism develops in stages and should be understood as an ideology adapted to contemporary conditions, including concentrated corporate and state power, surveillance and existential risks. She acknowledged censorship and totalitarian traditions on the left but argued that fascism specifically belongs to the political right. Klein also clarified that her reference to “Jewish fascists” concerned figures advocating political violence, placing Ben-Gvir in that category.