ISRAEL: Most Hated Country in the World?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
Of course! It was NIMBY, writ large.

-Arrian

Youre Harry Truman. After 20 years of restricted immigration, American Jews are assimilating, and antisemitism in the US is FINALLY on the wane. But it was still strong enough to be a tool against New Dealers only a few years ago, and its still rumbling underneath the surface. So much so that FDR had to go to great lengths to avoid the appearance that this was a war fought for the Jews. Now youve got a couple of million Jews in DP camps. Poor, many very unwesternized, many leftists. And unlike the Jews who came in the 1890s, etc NOT self selected for their strong liking for America and American culture.

OTOH youve also got Palestine, which was promised to the jews as a national home almost 30 years previously. Which has half a million jews already, and a thriving Jewish society. Univeristy, unions, yadda yadda.

and where MOST of the DPs seem to want to go.

Oh, and most American Jews want them to be allowed to go there also. Whether out of Zionist belief, or fear of renewed antisemitism if the unwashed cousins come here, or both, who knows.

I would respectfully suggest the choice is not all that difficult.

[Arrian]

I meant NIMBYism on the part of basically the entire West, not just the USA. And not just their governments but their populations.

Basically, people were happy to (or at least ok with) provide the Jews with their own state somewhere else where it was doable because... well, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ah. So you view it as a cynical ploy to destroy Israel from within.

I don't necessarily disagree - I don't really know enough to decide on that either way.

-Arrian

Some may well be attached to their long lost homes amidst the orange groves of Jaffa. Each and every one of which was a thing of beauty, the finest and fairest homes mankind has ever known, return to which will solve every problem.

Others want it is a ploy to destroy Israel. In some cases cynical. In some cases not cynical at all, but quite blatant.

As for Abbas, I give him the benefit of the doubt, and assume its a cynical ploy to keep a chip to trade for, say, water rights. Which I dont blame him for, as such cynicism is inherent in most negotiating processes.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
I meant NIMBYism on the part of basically the entire West, not just the USA. And not just their governments but their populations.

Ie large scale migration of eastern jews would never work due to, among other things, latent antisemitism in the West.

Congratulations, youve just figured out what Herzl did in 1894 (?) during the Dreyfus affair, and which he made explicit in his writings, including, IIRC, The Jewish State. You are now practically a pragmatic General Zionist of the Herzl school.

It may take some time to make you a Labour Zionist, but we can work on it

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I would respectfully suggest the choice is not all that difficult.

It probably wasn't, but all that amounts to the US and Israel being hated. The other western nations probably deserve a bigger share however.

[Arrian]

Congratulations, youve just figured out what Herzl did in 1894 (?) during the Dreyfus affair, and which he made explicit in his writings, including, IIRC, The Jewish State. You are now practically a pragmatic General Zionist of the Herzl school.

Be fair, I'm not "just figuring that out." I figured that out a while ago.

And no, I'm not a zionist or particularly in favor of zionism. While I understand why zionism came into existance, I don't necessarily agree that the drive for a Jewish state has and will be (when viewed through 20/20 hindsight long after we're dead) a good thing for the Jews, not to mention others (such as the Palestinians). But then I'm not Jewish, either.

-Arrian

edit: latent anti-semitism may have been the biggest factor, but even if there wasn't widespread dislike/hatred of Jews, NIMBY may still have applied. Pick a group nobody in the West hates (Armenians, perhaps?). Would countries open their doors to a massive influx of refugees then? Perhaps there would be a better chance than there was of it for the Jews in the early 20th century, but I don't know...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
I meant NIMBYism on the part of basically the entire West, not just the USA. And not just their governments but their populations.

But in 1946, the UK position, essentially was let them all go to the US so we can maintain our political position in the Arab world, ignoring the Balfour and League promises, the established Jewish community in Palestine, and the historical Jewish claims. To me THAT was nimbyism.

Why should I accept a homeless person in my backyard, when the homeless person HAS a home, that hes being kept out of by squatters, who wont even split the home in half with him? At the behest of others (With smaller homes) whose main goal is to stay on the good side of the squatters, for self interested (read imperial) reasons?

[Arrian]

Squatters?

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


You are welcome to it



I thought that was the one where you dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

That's the backup plan.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Squatters?

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian


And no, I'm not a zionist. While I understand why zionism came into existance, I don't necessarily agree that the drive for a Jewish state has and will be (when viewed through 20/20 hindsight long after we're dead) a good thing for the Jews, not to mention others (such as the Palestinians). But then I'm not Jewish, either.

-Arrian

Its not clear to me if you mean it wasnt a good idea GIVEN the latent and actual antisemitism of 1895, or only that you wish such antisemitism hadnt existed/.

If the latter, you are still not that far from Herzls position. As long as he believed in the triumph of European liberalism, he was NOT a Zionist. And while theres talk about the benefits of sovereignty beyond a haven in his writings, ultimately his views keep going back to that. A haven, both to give refugees from Russia a home, and to lessen the antisemitism threatening western Jews. And to save western liberalism from that antisemitism, which threatened liberal society.


Now of course it turned out that is was less Zion that saved the West from the threatening influx, than it was Hitler. But Herzl didnt know that, and had he done so, it would only have reinforced his urgency for a Jewish state.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
Squatters?

-Arrian

so to speak. To extend the Nimbyism metaphor. People with some rights by adverse possession if you prefer.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


BTW, whatever happened to those greenhouses at the Gaza settlements? They were thoroughly vandalized, werent they? Makes one wonder how seriously to take all the agonizing about "stolen" property.

Are you sure? I do remember reading an article within weeks of the forced evacuation showing pals in gaza occupying and repairing the greenhouses with the claim that the damage had been inflicted by the spiteful departing evacuees.

Has there been further damage since then?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Are you sure? I do remember reading an article within weeks of the forced evacuation showing pals in gaza occupying and repairing the greenhouses with the claim that the damage had been inflicted by the spiteful departing evacuees.

Has there been further damage since then?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2005/09/13/international/i112837D35.DTL&type=printable

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



You mean why didnt the Jews just move to the US and buy land?

At the time (1882 to 1918) there was growing hostility in the US to immigration, esp Jewish immigration, culminating in immigration restrictions imposed in 1920 or so. Which restrictions were not lifted when Jews were fleeing Hitler, not even during WW2. The Zionist movement arose at a time of massive persecution of Jews in Russia, at a time when large scale migration to the West was causing both movements to restrict immigration, and causing rising antisemitism. The need for a state was a need for a guaranteed place for immigration, in essence.

Even in Palestine, Jews were generally ok with the Mandate as long as immigration was open. It was with the reduction of immigrant visas, and the the closure to immigration by the White Paper in 1939, that statehood was demanded.

Are you comfortable with other countries filtering their immigration on the basis of ethnicity/religion? I wonder if it was necessary for Israel to adopt such policies. Couldn't the Aliyah have been continued simply using extremely relaxed immigration policies instead?

I have to say that such immigration policies don't sit well with me at all, even if outside of western countries nobody seems to see anything unusual about them in the slightest.