It's an interesting take on this conflict, from a premise that Curtis has explored in some of his documentaries, namely that, "It is the great shift of our time - the collapse of the dream that politicians could change the world for the better. A dream that was replaced by a conviction that politicians were untrustworthy and always become corrupted by power."
I don't think the story presented really supports the thesis that people are rejecting politics because it's too corruptible. Instead, it looks like people are engaging in an excessive amount of politics because they're confused and angry and political action gives them some hope of control: - The British trying to sabotage the Germans in WWI by starting an Arab revolt among the German's Turkish allies: politics. - The British trying to appeal to Jewish-American Zionists in order to coax the U.S. into entering WWI on the British side: politics. - The Black Hand Gang attacking Palestinian landowners, British officials, and Jewish settlers so it could establish an Islamic state in Palestine: politics. - Jewish settlers trying to establish an independent state consisting of co-ops and high-tech cities in the desert: politics. - Arab nationalists hoping to establish a unified socialist republic strong enough to fend off European influence: politics. - Egyptian espionage agents organizing the Fedayeen among Palestinian refugees to attack Israel after it had become a state and attacked them: politics. - The Muslim Brotherhood attempting to assassinate Nassar because he headed a secular state when they wanted a theocratic state: politics. - Jews fighting over how, or whether, the Holocaust should be remembered and understood because they were worried about how that might influence the way Israel was perceived: politics. - Israel preemptively attacking Egypt because it believed Egypt was about to preemptively attack it (because they believed they were about to be preemptively attacked): politics. - Palestinian and German terrorists hijacking an airliner and keeping the Jewish passengers hostage because they represented Western hegemony in Arabia: politics. - The Muslim Brotherhood taking positions of power in Egyptian trade unions and professional associations because they had been banned from becoming a political party after they had attempted a coup: politics. - Israel encouraging Hamas to sabotage the PLO because it thought this would weaken Palestinian politics: politics. - Hamas attacking civilians in an attempt to get the reactionary Likud party elected in Israel so it would stop the peace accords and keep the PLO from taking credit for stopping the violence: politics.
Excellent response, but I'm not sure I agree, or perhaps understand, what you mean by 'excessive politics.' Perhaps we have a different definition of politics, or what it means to achieve something by political means. I wouldn't generally consider airplane hijackings, and many of the other points you selected as politics. Certainly, not in the ethical sense of politics, where ethical is antonymous of corruptible.
Politics is: Governance, which is what most people think of when someone says politics, is really only one form of politics, which we already knew if we would stop long enough to think about it for a minute. After all, there's office politics, sexual politics, high-school social politics, religious politics, the political economy, and so on. (Of course, we don't have to turn anything and everything into power struggles, and smart people won't, but some people just can't see things in any other terms.) Excessive politics are politics run out-of-control, and things like hijackings and violence and warfare are bare-bones, brass-knuckle, politics.Perhaps we have a different definition of politics