Comments on: SURVEY: Palestinian citizens demand social justice

By: Rachel Lever

Rachel Lever — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 17:55:49 +0000

Dahlia, this is very impressive and useful information. You, together with Joseph Dana, expressed most bleakly the policy limitations at the start of the movement. Do you feel that this data, and J14′s recent declaration of a manifesto for a “New State of Israel” for all its inhabitants, makes it all much more hopeful? (If you’d like to make this an ongoing conversation, do respond by email)

By: Rachel Lever

Rachel Lever — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 23:10:41 +0000

(sorry, got cut off in the middle) … J14 has the momentum and support to enter the party political arena with the programme it has now launched. Electoral activity need not be counterposed to rank and file creativity and democracy, and J14 could surely form a united front with many of the social and human rights organisations and Palestinian political and civil society groupings, subject to whatever “non-political” constraints they may have. The goal of a direct electoral challenge will also help to hold the movement together and give it a focus, which answers Greg’s question, I think.

By: Rachel Lever

Rachel Lever — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 23:02:12 +0000

Greg asks whether J14 can keep going until Knesset elections, but does not ask what will be its rolein those elections. Both questions can be answered in one: instead of leaving the field to the existing parties, it’s time for a renewal of the whole political scene, and J14, with the great fund of goodwill it gained in the summer and has kept going since with a whole range of social direct actions

By: Dahlia Scheindlin

Dahlia Scheindlin — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:43:48 +0000

Jonathan, I collapsed the four-point scale in that way because the original cross tabulations, with each response separate, showed very clearly that the frequencies were very similar between Arabs/Arab-Israelis on the one hand, and Pal/Pal-Isr on the other. If the frequencies had turned up with large similarities between those who chose “Pal” and “Arab” I would have collapsed them that way. This was true for a number of questions throughout the survey (in which there was a high standard deviation – other questions showed little variation based at all). In other words, I didn’t collapse them that way because I saw a similarity of distributions on just one question, but consistently, on many questions.
*
In terms of your suggestion for 3 categories, that makes things easy for analysis, but i don’t believe it reflects the common discourse here. I try to ask questions that the respondents will feel natural answering and that reflect common thinking. Many people here think that “Arab-Israeli” or “Pal-Isr” for that matter – is the most accurate description (in addition to others) – note that both options received higher responses than the single-ID “Arab” or “Pal.” To deny this to impose your political vision on them, rather than acknowledging how they think. Maybe you’ll say i’m imposing my vision – but realize that I developed the survey with the close cooperation of the Abraham Fund leadership – both Jews and Arabs in Israel – and they contributed actively to the survey design.
*
Having said all that, surely there is an inevitable unconscious researcher bias in most surveys. It would be disingenuous to deny that. I might have done some other things here too, if it was a longer study – but not regarding the question you suggest. At best, I might have asked as a follow-up their 2nd primary identity and then collapsed accordingly. but sadly, there’s never enough room for all the questions we need. Thanks for your comment.

By: Jonathan Cook

Jonathan Cook — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:18:29 +0000

Hi Dahlia. Thanks for sharing the survey info. There’s much of interest in there. But I share Sinjim’s concern about the issue of identity. You offered four identities and then split your respondents’ data into “Arab” and “Arab Israeli” identities on the one hand and “Palestinian” and “Palestinian Israeli” on the other. But as these are primary identities, that is a big assumption to be making. The secondary identity of many of your “Arab” respondents may well be “Palestinian” and they may be profoundly opposed to the notion of an “Israeli Arab” identity. If you want to schematise their identity in this way, problematic as the exercise inevitably is, you’d be better to have offered three categories: “Israeli”, “Arab” and “Palestinian”, and then sought to analyse the other responses in the light of these primary identities. I think such an analysis would have been more relevant.

By: corey

corey — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 08:30:12 +0000

As someone who lives here what can i get involved in to work together for a better society for all?

By: Dahlia Scheindlin

Dahlia Scheindlin — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 07:57:11 +0000

@Brent – you’re right. It’s also common to find stronger support for various democratic principles among Arabs, compared to Jews in israel, particularly (not surprisingly) when it comes to basic civil rights, equality, freedom of expression, etc. I don’t hear so much about the vision document these days, but I think the activist core I observed in the data is a hint: it seems to be led by people who want to be integrated and vital in Israel, AS palestinians, and without feeling like they have to sacrifice their palestinian identity to do so. although methinks this group too is not monolithic.
@Greg, your knowledge and analytic insight always contribute so much. Combined with your optimism and realism, you’re a winner.

By: Dahlia Scheindlin

Dahlia Scheindlin — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 07:52:01 +0000

@Sinjim, your angry tone notwithstanding, I’m glad you pointed that out, because I originally started writing something similar, but ended up cutting for space and hoped it would be clear from what I did write – you’ve confirmed that it is. Indeed, the question was carefully worded so that we were not asking people to exclude other identities, just to point out which one they choose first. Certainly what I’ve written here is shorthand for “those who identified first, before other identities, as Arab” but that’s a bit wordy to write each time.

By: Greg Pollock

Greg Pollock — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 05:57:29 +0000

In an underemployed population, organizing for social protest is a form of ecnomic survival for some. They establish new ties, strengthen old ones, thereby on both accounts perhaps more likely to recieve word of a job opportunity (even if brief), food donation, or time donation (such as caring for a child or transporting someone somewhere when needed). These activities produce return obligations for later.
.
As I think I’ve already mentioned here, the Montgomery bus boycott worked because blacks donated their cars and time to get those refusing the buses to their necessary destinations. This foraged new ties and created reciprocal obligations for later payback. Jim Crow segregation enabled this network by placing an entire class under the same limitations; prior networks expanded naturally once the boycott began, and these networks provided opportunity for later economic protest elsewhere. Jim Crowing can be self induced. Christian right networks opposing abortion or health reform thrive by a form of isolation similar to self sacrifice (“I stay among people who love the Lord”) which can then label someone for access to some opportunity (many in Christian networks are lower middle class, with very limited income, afraid of any new bills or crises coming).
.
I read this amazing survey as evidence of latent networks available for expansion. But regular protests are essential, recreating the internal social environemnt of network aid. Protest movements live on what happens between the necessry protests. A “Palestinian” self label suggests, to me, a greater propensity to break free of overt community networks; so the greater % of participation. J14 is limited by its protest form. Israeli (and American) democracy have evolved to limit the intrusion of new networks sans elections; the Tea Party worked because of the severe economic downturn, coupled with mandated short cycle elections (the House). This makes American democracy a bit crazy (the Tea Party is beginning to flounder before budget and service realities) by sustaining a rather high level of network activity relative to parliamentary systems. Trade Unions provided another means of network maintenance in the 30′s through 70′s.
.
What seems missing in Isreal is the recurrence of low level, regular protests. Wickedly, the Knesset, by continuing its assault against all enemies real or not, may create something of a structural equivalent of low level protest. Yet people wanting to protest need to be able to eat. Network participation needs a personal payoff with some probability. The social challenge of J14 (to me) is to sustain some form of low level protest until the next election approaches. And I by far fail of understanding Israeli society to know if and how that can be done.
.
This survey, which might have gone otherwise, not just keeps hope alive; it grows hope.

By: sh

sh — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 21:22:31 +0000

Just as one thinks the mess is too great to be cleared up, something comes up to show that again, we haven’t quite got it right.
.
I particularly liked the finding that “Participation encouraged cooperation: about half (49%) of people who participated in the social protests say they are now more interested in cooperating with Jews in Israel, compared to 24% of those who didn’t participate in J14.”
.
We must give up thinking in sectors. There is no “migzar Aravi”, they have the same economic and social needs as we do. There is no “peripheria” in a country this size, the concept is ludicrous. And Arabs/Palestinians are no more “mi’utim” than Russians, Ethiopians or Americans are.