The conflict with the Islamic fascists is about the quest for the perfect State. This is nothing new. The driving force behind Hilter and Lenin and many others was to create the perfect State.

There of course has never been a perfect State, though everyone who has had any wisdom, knows that a democratic state is the best as compared to any other. There are many kinds of democratic states and because of the nature of human beings all States will have some element within them that could be called democratic. This is because human beings only live a certain period of time, and because humans by their nature can not controlled as though they were simple robots- in other words, new leadership needs some way of being selected, and any leadership needs some degree of consent by those governed.

A simple or pure democracy has no rules and people as individual manage or nelgect matters in whatever manner they choose. This doesn't exist; the nature of humans doesn't allow this to exist, nor does this exist even with animals. Humans and animals are hardwired to establish or learn social rules. Humans or animals learn how to make a living and how to interact with their species or the species that has adopted them. Human beings are a social creature, that btw is also potentially a dangerous predator.

So for practical purposes a simple or pure democracy would be where there were a few rules- perhaps you call these natural rules which deal with: how you make a living and how you interact with the family or "species". This kind of pure democracy has existed, and one could artifically get this kind of situation simply by having a small group people which is isolated and where normal rules/behavior are not applicable and not worth the effort to maintain. Or, and perhaps this might be making it less clear and fuzzier, but anyway, one could take page from "Einstein's Space and Van Gogh's Sky" and say we frequently transform into this type of reality on daily basis. In other words rather than a social system "lost" in some distance past, it's with us in the present, and varying depending upon various situations- get stuck in elevator with people, or go camping, or going to a bar, etc. And of course also the other of kind social systems, such as a Totalitarian State can experienced as a reality.

Moving on, normally a pure democracy is associated with idea of deciding things by popular vote- rules and judgement and future policy is something crafted and voted upon by every citizen- which is contrasted with voting for a person who will represent your interest.
Or rule by a mob or rule by a large "committee" that includes all citizens.
This type democracy is pretty inefficent- a critical aspect is who gets to bring up a issue in which something voted upon and who gets to decide when something is voted upon. Obviously if you have a million people who could bring up a issue you could have a million issues to decide upon and that could all be in a single day and every day- in other words there simply isn't enough time. The system can work if group concerned is small and can actually talk to each other, and/or issue being decided is fairly rare- and it can be hoped that the majority of the citizens are fairly informed in regards to matter being decided upon.

Anyways, I could go on and on, but I mainly had two issues/questions.
First I thought that since Israel is not a perfect state and instead is a mostly intended as a jewish state, I think the Jews might be intelluctually interested in helping to create a perfect state- instead of having the focus of having a two state solution, they should instead want to create the best state they can possibly imagine and of course still a have their Jewish state of Israel. So question is what would be the structure of a perfect state?