Zionism, Pros and Cons

[AK_ID]

Continued from another thread ...

Somewhere, whether in this group or elsewhere I don't remember at the moment, I joined a discussion regarding American Indians -- the other party felt, apparently, that the land should be returned to its original owners (or at least to the earliest owners of record). Perhaps that would be a good starting point for a new discussion on Israel. Stewardship of the land is also, from my point of view, a reasonable argument for ownership.

Thoughts? Perhaps someone would enjoy defending Arab/Turk ownership of the land over yonder, especially considering the centuries-old environmental devastation of Arab land management, and the human rights record of Islam?

So, let's talk Zionism.

 

[David]

Continued from another thread ...

Somewhere, whether in this group or elsewhere I don't remember at the moment, I joined a discussion regarding American Indians -- the other party felt, apparently, that the land should be returned to its original owners (or at least to the earliest owners of record). Perhaps that would be a good starting point for a new discussion on Israel. Stewardship of the land is also, from my point of view, a reasonable argument for ownership.

Thoughts? Perhaps someone would enjoy defending Arab/Turk ownership of the land over yonder, especially considering the centuries-old environmental devastation of Arab land management, and the human rights record of Islam?

So, let's talk Zionism.

Zionism is, at it's core, the belief in a a Jewish Manifest Destiny, a self-fulfillment of prophecy and of ultra-nationalism. The result is a brutal far-right state, secular in law but theocratic in attitude and with an uncompromising militancy checked only by America and it's (or should I say our) own imperial ambitions. The Zionists (Jewish or Christian, Israeli or Western) like to justify their actions in response to Islamist attacks by Palestinians. Swept under the rug is the Zionist oppression of non-Jews, namely Muslims and Arab/Palestinian Christians (a not-insignificant minority). Zionists claim that they have a right to the land as part of their (long broken they seem to forget) Covenant. While Muslims are displaced to make room for illegal (by Israeli law no less) settlements, Bethlehem, the Mecca of Christianity, has had it's Christian population decimated by Zionist favoritism of Jews and generalizing policy in regards to Palestinians. Arab/Palestinian Jews are no better if not open with their religion and tend to be labeled as traitors if they are yet remain pro-Palestine (never mind that they're Palestinians).

It's a system not universally accepted and openly opposed by a large % of the Israeli population but a lack of Leftist success in elected gov't have prevented this opposition from translating into policy changes. Even the Israeli defeat (by their own admission) in the Israel-Hezbollah War has failed to trigger a policy shift.

Do the Jews have a claim? Yes but so do the Christians, Muslims and to a lesser extent, Bah?'

 

[AK_ID]

Zionism is, at it's core, the belief in a a Jewish Manifest Destiny, a self-fulfillment of prophecy and of ultra-nationalism. The result is a brutal far-right state, secular in law but theocratic in attitude and with an uncompromising militancy checked only by America and it's (or should I say our) own imperial ambitions. The Zionists (Jewish or Christian, Israeli or Western) like to justify their actions in response to Islamist attacks by Palestinians. Swept under the rug is the Zionist oppression of non-Jews, namely Muslims and Arab/Palestinian Christians (a not-insignificant minority). Zionists claim that they have a right to the land as part of their (long broken they seem to forget) Covenant. While Muslims are displaced to make room for illegal (by Israeli law no less) settlements, Bethlehem, the Mecca of Christianity, has had it's Christian population decimated by Zionist favoritism of Jews and generalizing policy in regards to Palestinians. Arab/Palestinian Jews are no better if not open with their religion and tend to be labeled as traitors if they are yet remain pro-Palestine (never mind that they're Palestinians).

It's a system not universally accepted and openly opposed by a large % of the Israeli population but a lack of Leftist success in elected gov't have prevented this opposition from translating into policy changes. Even the Israeli defeat (by their own admission) in the Israel-Hezbollah War has failed to trigger a policy shift.

Do the Jews have a claim? Yes but so do the Christians, Muslims and to a lesser extent, Bah?'?.

Yes, and Christians, Muslims and Bah?'? are extended full legal rights in Israel proper -- the same rights that are extended to Jews, whether orthodox or not. You or I, regardless of our religious preference, are welcome to worship in any way we please in Israel, and to visit any holy sites (a vast improvement over Muslim or Christian management of that part of the world over the past few centuries), just as we are here in the States, provided that form of worship doesn't include strapping a bomb around our chests and walking into a crowded cafe.

You might want to research your information on the Jewish religious right and so-called Manifest Destiny. Orthodox Judaism opposed the creation of the Jewish state (no messiah, no nation), and in most cases, still opposes the state. Modern Israel was created by secularists. As I suspected would be the case, you're arguing from half a platform.

Also, you really need to look back to 1948, when at the end of the Brit Palestine mandate (at which time the Brits left all territorial armaments to the Arabs, and left the Jews apparently helpless), many thousands of Arabs left the territory, even though they were asked to stay by Jews. The Arab world was, for reasons of its own, unable to absorb those fellow Arabs, and Israel is stuck dealing with them. Research it, and then try to prove me wrong.

Many (not all) of the Arabs in Israeli-occupied territories are interested in destroying, and not much else. Meanwhile, the Jews have been building. Please refer back to my comments on stewardship of the land.

 

[obtuseobserver]

I do not see the Israeli government interested in expanding its territory or extending hegemony over the region.

Manifest Destiny was a secular movement. We took California away from Mexico after the Mexican-American War.

It made sense to many Americans to occupy and control the land between California and the territory east of the Mississippi. As a general matter this expansion is what human populations have done throughout history. For good or bad there is nothing unusual about what happened.

As a general matter those critical of Manifest Destiny usually look to the worst acts of Americans as the standard of the day while ignoring bad acts by native people. They tend to adopt the Noble Savage view which is entirely naive and indicates that the discussion is pointless. We kicked the natives' collective asses and took their land. Taking the view that this was an evil act ignores the history of human existence. If we regard the taking of America as evil we'd be hard pressed to find any territory on the planet currently occupied by a population that didn't take it from some one else.

 

[AK_ID]

Yes, some of those noble savages ate one another. Very white of them.

Regarding Israel, you're correct, Obtuse (God, you really need to change your handle -- you're anything but obtuse, except when discussing lutefisk). There is no move towards expansionism in Israel, but rather a desire to hold onto a few meager past gains. There is no desire for new territory. Hell, Jews don't even want to convert anyone, and would prefer all y'all keep your own beliefs, a rarity among religions. It's too damned much trouble to make a new Jew.

And yeah, as I mentioned somewhere here a day or three ago, we'd be in a heck of a fix if we all had to abandon our conquered territories and return to our place of origin. That fertile crescent would be a bit crowded.

 

[obtuseobserver]

I have heard that the new cooking process for lutefisk has greatly reduced the stench. I, however, will never know.

 

[AK_ID]

Dude, we're derailing this thread before it had a chance to leave the station. What's new, eh? Wait until the Keystone Cop chief arrives.

 

[AK_ID]

Back to the OP, I notice David had no comment regarding Arab/Turk stewardship of that little slice of land (or, for that matter, of any piece of land they've managed over the centuries). Not much worth defending on that count, eh?

 

[David]

Back to the OP, I notice David had no comment regarding Arab/Turk stewardship of that little slice of land (or, for that matter, of any piece of land they've managed over the centuries). Not much worth defending on that count, eh?

Nobody has cared about that place since the Romans left. Even the Crusaders ignored what they could afford to ignore. The place, if not for religion, is utterly worthless from a geo-political POV and has been since the Romans (as I've already said) left and it's only value to them was slaves and a buffer from Persia (Iranians have always caused trouble it seems). So ya the Arabs/Turks ignored it, what reason did they have to do otherwise (it's not like Humanist thinking was prevalent at the time)?

 

[obtuseobserver]

Nobody has cared about that place since the Romans left. Even the Crusaders ignored what they could afford to ignore.

But that's a tautology of sorts. People tend to ignore lands they can afford to ignore without regard to any specific location or group of people. Simply said, people pay more attention to things they value than things they do not.

The place, if not for religion, is utterly worthless from a geo-political POV

The Jews in Gaza (other places too) had turned the desert into a garden. From the perspective of feeding people it makes that piece of land very valuable.

and has been since the Romans (as I've already said) left and it's only value to them was slaves and a buffer from Persia (Iranians have always caused trouble it seems).

That region is the cross road to three continents. The value for trade his been extremely high for a very long time not ending with the Romans.

So ya the Arabs/Turks ignored it, what reason did they have to do otherwise (it's not like Humanist thinking was prevalent at the time)?

Taxing trade perhaps?

 

[AK_ID]

Nobody has cared about that place since the Romans left. Even the Crusaders ignored what they could afford to ignore. The place, if not for religion, is utterly worthless from a geo-political POV and has been since the Romans (as I've already said) left and it's only value to them was slaves and a buffer from Persia (Iranians have always caused trouble it seems). So ya the Arabs/Turks ignored it, what reason did they have to do otherwise (it's not like Humanist thinking was prevalent at the time)?

Then why do you care now? What is your beef with Jews creating a decent homeland on a very small patch of our planet? I'll leave be your ignorance of history for the moment, although it is notable. And you still didn't answer my question regarding stewardship of the land. I assume such things are of import for youngsters these days. Or I'd certainly hope so.

 

[David]

But that's a tautology of sorts. People tend to ignore lands they can afford to ignore without regard to any specific location.



The Jews in Gaza had turned the desert into a garden. From the perspective of feeding people it makes that piece of land very valuable.



That region is the cross road to three continents. The value for trade his been extremely high for a very long time not ending with the Romans.



Taxing trade perhaps?

I think your missing my point (I'm not including Israel in this, it should go without saying they've done wonders with the place). Ya it's a major trade route but aside from a few ports that never got rich and heavily guarded roads, what did anyone do? The people were poor peasants trying to not starve in a desert. Even the Romans didn't bother with development, Judea, an independent nation, did. The fact is, outside the Holy sites, only the Jews have ever cared about the place. It, for most of it's history, has been nothing but sand crisscrossed by some major roads. Were are the Romes? The great temples (Abrahamic sites excluded)? The ruins of once great civilizations? You'll never find them because they never existed. Jerusalem is the sole speck of greatness aside from a few old Roman forts. I'm not dissing the people, As I said I find Jews to be a wonderful people (with lots of hot women :giggle but the place has been considered worthless.

Now Israel is a powerhouse with some of the most fertile farmland in Asia (because Israel is an Asian nation even if people tend to forget) but before the '60s, '70s? Hardly a place anyone would want to retire to.

 

[David]

Then why do you care now? What is your beef with Jews creating a decent homeland on a very small patch of our planet? I'll leave be your ignorance of history for the moment, although it is notable. And you still didn't answer my question regarding stewardship of the land. I assume such things are of import for youngsters these days. Or I'd certainly hope so.

Read my response to Obtuse. <Filler>

 

[AK_ID]

So ya the Arabs/Turks ignored it, what reason did they have to do otherwise (it's not like Humanist thinking was prevalent at the time)?

We old guys are slow. Get used to it. But one more thing came to mind, and I should clarify. I did not say that other tenants of that land ignored it. They merely destroyed it, and very nicely.

Oh, and we invented humanism -- probably one of the inventions for which we should apologize.

 

[AK_ID]

Read my response to Obtuse. <Filler>

And so what's your beef with Jews building a decent homeland?

 

[David]

And so what's your beef with Jews building a decent homeland?

Mind pointing out where I said that? I think I actually complemented Israel's development work.

 

[obtuseobserver]

The fact is, outside the Holy sites, only the Jews have ever cared about the place.

I disagree with most of what you said but can we take this comment ^ as the response to the stewardship question?

If so shouldn't you advocate for Jewish control of that terrirtory as they have done wonderful things and are the only ones who care about it?

It, for most of it's history, has been nothing but sand crisscrossed by some major roads. Were are the Romes? The great temples (Abrahamic sites excluded)? The ruins of once great civilizations? You'll never find them because they never existed.

Not terribly accurate from a historical sense but getting to the temples. The Jewish, Christian and Mulsim temples don't count? Awfully convenient to rule out the holy sites for the three largest monotheistic religions. Just because there are no Roman temples in Jerusalem doesn't mean it wasn't a very important place.

Look up Ephesus... that city in the region was of amazing importance for many reasons and it has plenty of your Roman ruins. It is also the site a an very early Christian community.

You are not familiar enough with the history of the region to make your pronouncements. The number of important sites datig to the classical era is very large. It only diminshes when you restrict the geographical scope to Jerusalem and eliminate the Abrahamic faiths as irrelevent. You cannot consider the region and its importance without those facts. Or rather you can but it would be pointless.

Jerusalem is the sole speck of greatness aside from a few old Roman forts. I'm not dissing the people, As I said I find Jews to be a wonderful people (with lots of hot women :giggle but the place has been considered worthless.

Lol... sure.

Now[/I] Israel is a powerhouse with some of the most fertile farmland in Asia (because Israel is an Asian nation even if people tend to forget) but before the '60s, '70s? Hardly a place anyone would want to retire to.

Israel is culturally a western nation. The land there now is the same land that has been there for thousands of years. That you are unaware of the good use to which it was put is your own issue.

 

[obtuseobserver]

Mind pointing out where I said that? I think I actually complemented Israel's development work.

You called their government beneath pond scum

I think that may have been the source of the notion that you think they are lower than pond scum.... they have a popularly elected government so it is representative of the people which by extension are mostly lower than pond scum

 

[AK_ID]

Even the Romans didn't bother with development, Judea, an independent nation, did. The fact is, outside the Holy sites, only the Jews have ever cared about the place. It, for most of it's history, has been nothing but sand crisscrossed by some major roads. Were are the Romes? The great temples (Abrahamic sites excluded)? The ruins of once great civilizations? You'll never find them because they never existed. Jerusalem is the sole speck of greatness aside from a few old Roman forts. I'm not dissing the people, As I said I find Jews to be a wonderful people (with lots of hot women :giggle but the place has been considered worthless.

Now Israel is a powerhouse with some of the most fertile farmland in Asia (because Israel is an Asian nation even if people tend to forget) but before the '60s, '70s? Hardly a place anyone would want to retire to.

I've certainly considered retiring there. Best medical care on the planet, kids who respect their elders most of the time, and yes, some very pretty young women (stay away from my cousins).

Up towards the top of your post, you mention that the Jews are the only folks who ever cared about the place. Once again, then why your obvious issue with Zionism? If the only people who care about the place, and the only ones who ever managed to make the place flourish, are Jews, then why not give them their homeland, and consider it a deed well done? That fertile farmland didn't come from a Sears catalog, you know? It required decades of reversing centuries of what would today be considered environmental abuse.

 

[David]

You called their government beneath poind scum

I think that may have been the source of the notion that you think they are lower than pond scum.... they have a popularly elected government so it is representative of the people which by extension are mostly lower than pond scum

So not liking the gov't = thinking that Israel shouldn't be fixing place up? No offense but that's some odd logic and I've seen alot of odd logic on the many forums I post on.

As for that point on elections, did the people vote on who would be best for them or for who ran the most entertaining campaign? As you said, it's a Western nation.

And actually I do think the Jews are the most efficent developers of the territory, that doesn't excuse keeping the Palestinians down.