 |
 |
I didn't think you were being rude. I've also been shouted at for my non-Zionist views. I'd just like to add a footnote which touches on both discussions--this and the discussion of the Hashak article. The idea of a return to Palestine for the Jewish people as a whole has historically been dependent upon the idea of an eventual restoration of the kingdom of David by the messiah--who, remember, will be "the son of David," i.e., his descendant. At the time of the establishment of the modern state of Israel most of the ultra ultra orthodox Hasidic sects refused, on theological grounds, to recognize its legitimacy--it wasn't the Israel they were supposed to return to, because the messianic kingdom had not been established. The only sect to recognize the theological legitimacy of modern Israel (at any rate the only significant one--I don't completely trust my memory here, and as a lifelong atheist my involvement has been pretty marginal) was the Lubavitchers. Another note: there has always been a small Jewish community in Palestine. Partly it was a survival of the Roman wars, and it was increased slightly by religion-motivated pilgrims and students. Its primary center was in S'fad on the Sea of Galilee, where a theology school was established around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. But it was a very small community. Rishon L'zion, the first Kibbutz, was founded, I think, but don't hold me to it, in 1886. If you checked the numbers before then you'd find even fewer Jews. Herzl, the begetter of the Zionist movement, began his career as a German nationalist. There were a lot of Jewish German nationalists before the 1850s. But the German nattionalist movement became incresingly hostile to non-Germans within the heimat. Herzl found what he thought was a solution at a time when homeland movements were springing up or at least gaining greatly increased strength all over Europe. Every volk was supposed to have a heimat. When Bush and co., with their exquisite talent for words, named the new internal security agency the Dept. of Homeland Protection I felt a cold wind from the pit. The idea of the US as a homeland in the sense that it's been applied in other countries is pretty novel, and pretty chilling. Mark At 09:37 PM 9/28/2001 +0100, you wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]> >To: <[log in to unmask]> >Sent: 28 September 2001 20:45 >Subject: Re: Letter to a leftist friend/the real mystics/innocents > > >| This is a very different question from what's been under discussion, >| Lawrence. The subject has been whether traditional Jewish law allows or >| justifies atrocities against non-Jews, which it doesn't. > >It is different, yes; but it is related > >Thank you for answering. > >I thought after posting the message that it was rather rude, and I apologise >for that, if it came over that way. I have, as I said, been attacked before >for daring to raise the question. > >| Israel was born of Romantic irridentism fueled by extreme desperation. > >I am very interested in that response. It has seemed to me that the desire >to reestablish Israel was very similar to a number of other movements where >the people concerned were already in the countries and seeking liberation >from foreigners - Greece for example > >| Until the 1890s almost none had actually done either, although most >Ottoman >| regimes welcomed the small numbers who did come. > >ok, yes... a while ago when I was called a fool and other things for not >knowing that there had always been masses of Jews in Palestine. I did some >research to find there were about 80000 a century ago > >| As far as I know, until fairly late in the pre-1948 conflict no one >| proposed that Jews had the right to oust anyone. It was only later that >the >| Biblical narrative was used as an excuse for expropriation. > >That is my reading. I went through a whole pile of documents - I forget >where but all the documents relating are on one web site from the Balfour >declaration onwards. One can read a narrative through the increasingly >strident denials that the Palestine should be converted into a Jewish state > >| None of this justifies what happened. No group's desperation allows it to >| impose desperation on another group. The excuses followed the behavior. >| >| This is of course not unique--there were plenty of legal and messianic >| justifications ex post facto for the destruction of most of the Amerindian >| population, and it didn't take the idea of a lost ancestral homeland. > >Yes, indeed > >Well... thank you is all I can say. Very clear and very helpful > > >Lawrence >