Skip Navigation

You're viewing a single thread.

4 comments
  • https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2018-11-14/ty-article-opinion/the-twisted-logic-of-the-jewish-historic-right-to-israel/0000017f-db53-d3ff-a7ff-fbf3bcc50000

    Until World War II, the vast majority of Eastern and Western Jews – traditionalist, Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Communists and Bundists – were avowed anti-Zionists. They did not wish for sovereignty over themselves within a nation-state framework in the Middle East. The Bundists did in fact see themselves, and quite rightly, as a Yiddish people in need of cultural-linguistic autonomy, but they rejected outright the proposal to immigrate to Palestine as part of a project of a trans-world Jewish nation.

    And here we come to the last desperate attempt to justify the Zionist enterprise retroactively: Zionism as a response to an emergency situation. History, unfortunately, was more tragic. Zionism failed utterly to rescue Europe’s Jews, nor could it have done so. From 1882 until 1924, the Jews streamed in their masses – about 2.5 million – to the North American continent of promise. And yes, had it not been for the racist Johnson-Reed Immigration Act that prevented continued immigration, another million or perhaps two million of these souls might have been saved.

    Even the Jews did not want Israel, they only took it as a last resort because European and North American countries didn't want any more.

    Chaim Gans isn’t comfortable with this historical narrative, especially when the oppression of the natives and the plundering of their land is continuing even now. Zionism, which succeeded in forging a new nation, is not prepared to recognize its political-cultural-linguistic creation, nor even the specific national rights which that process conferred on it. But Gans, ultimately, is right. From Meir Kahane to Meretz, all Zionists continue to view the state we live in not as a democratic republic belonging to all its Israeli citizens – who definitely have a right to self-determination – but as a political entity that belongs to the Jews of the world, who like their forebears have no wish to come here or to define themselves as Israelis.

    • They did not wish for sovereignty over themselves within a nation-state framework in the Middle East.

      That's true for most of Jewish history, but the author from Haaretz (Sand) is not explaining it in this article. I'm surprised he doesn't mention Jerusalem even once in his opinion piece. The city of Jerusalem is mentioned in so many Jewish prayers and practices, only maybe surpassed by the story of the exodus from Egypt.
      The original article (from ajc.org) does provide the main (religious) reason for the fact that only small groups of Jews immigrated to the land of Israel before the 19th century.

      Traditional Jewish religious thought stated that the Jews had been exiled from their homeland as a punishment from God. They could only return in Messianic times. This belief kept most Jews from thinking about a return to living in Israel.

      Also, when you're a persecuted and an oppressed minority for 2000 years, it's very difficult for you to believe that you could take your fate into your own hands. Think about the profound ideological persuasion you need to have in order to think you can fight against the British empire or the Ottoman empire, and establish a safe homeland for your people.
      Only after the horrors of the holocaust and the establishment of the state of Israel, there were mass immigration of Jews to the land.

    • Jew took it because it was there stolen property also not all Jews are Zionists that's a common misconception