Comments on: Why no Israeli government will ever impose mandatory IDF service on the ultra-Orthodox

By: sh

sh — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:27:37 +0000

“And, how are these acts justified? Biblically. Zionism depends on the Bible to act as a land register.”

..”The real issue is metaphysical: An Israeli government cannot forfeit these places if Israel’s reason to exist is a homeland for Jews in the land of their forefathers.”

Sorry for the stupid question, but if the bible is a land register, someone must have collated an itemised list of lands registered in the name of Jews or the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Can anyone point me to it?

I’m really puzzled also by the question of full-time study for yeshiva students on the scale it has assumed in Israel. In the diaspora the vast majority of haredim work and only study in their spare time. Full-time study, financed by philanthropists, used to be for prodigies only.

By: michael livingston

michael livingston — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:56:26 +0000

I think this theme is developed by Ze’ev Sternhell in The Founding Myths of Zionism. But it doesn’t have to end that way. A Haredi, not to mention an Arab, population that was fully “on board” with the state would do more to legitimize it than the current arrangement.

By: Kolumn9

Kolumn9 — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:14:05 +0000

The political narrative of the Palestinian movement is one that rejects a connection between Jews and the land of Israel. This is the stumbling block to that 2nd grader’s ignorance. It is the premeditated ignorance of Jews forced upon her by her political leadership in order to sustain the ‘hate’ towards Israel. A single visit by an Israeli couple, though commendable, isn’t going to override the overwhelming rejection of any legitimacy of a connection between Jews and Israel, except potentially as some footnote to the common Arab/Muslim narrative of the vague ‘tolerance’ of minorities.

I am also going to point out that putting the blame for the bad perception of Jews on Jews is not exactly a new pattern. The whole idea that a perception shift is expected to come from outside the internal Palestinian narrative is very sad and only suggests that you perceive the Palestinians as being incapable of actually acting on their own behalf.

Note that the reason why the Palestinians have made no changes to their internal narrative is because accepting the Jewish connection to Israel forces them to accept partition as a legitimate solution (not a phase) and works towards remove the future threat of a return to hate-driven terrorism which they rely on as a strategy. To go back to the beginning of my point, this is the fundamental reason why the Palestinian leadership sticks to the narrative that rejects the Jewish connection to Jerusalem and the land of Israel and why that second grader has no understanding of Jewish symbols or the importance of the land of Israel to Jews.

As for Palestinian liberation vs Palestinian nationalism. If 99% of the population believes and acts out of Palestinian nationalism and drives both strategy and means and 1% participate in the exact same acts but do so out of a belief in Palestinian liberation, what precisely is the practical impact of their beliefs? This is especially so where the ‘rights’ discourse has been hijacked by the Palestinian nationalist movement and is being used as a tool to push for their own nationalist objectives.

By: ish yehudi

ish yehudi — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:48:29 +0000

first- thanks to all on the thread for writing…
@Aristeides- when you or I call the situation assymetrical- keep in mind that that is an objective assesment from the outside– this is directly related to what my comment is about- understanding the others narrative. You say its asymmetrical? Israelis live with the feeling of “we’re under fire.” Palestinians live with the feeling “we’re under fire.” Whether one is more objectively true has not impact on how the other feels. We are both expert victims here.
@Vicki– First- K9 wrote a line that is absolutely true and to the gist of what i’m ranting about:
“It is a conscious choice by their leadership and cultural authorities to deny any significance to the symbols used by the Jews and the IDF and to leave their people in a state of ignorance about who the other side is and why they are on the land. ”
I’ve heard this directly from people in the appropriate PA Ministries. That there was a strategic decision to change their discourse from being “anti-Jewish” to “anti-Zionist” because there was many Jews who were potential supporters of the Palestinian national cause that were alienated by the anti-Jewish rhetoric.
SO they changed the approach in schools/ media etc to detach Zionism from Judaism.
I appreciate the religious sensitivity you describe amongst colleagues in protecting Judaism from the evils of the Zionist enterprise. I’d rather you call on us to live out or redefineour highest Jewish values.
To substant what i wrote above about the decision to detach Israel from the Jews- I heard this from the mouth of someone “in the system” in a candid discussion (part of what I’m doing about it- listen and sharing). But this is the aggravating problem i’m talking about. I don’t want to belabor the point-like i said, i’m asking the question about what to do with it, practically in the face of anti-normalization. But where is the talk here on 972 of peace education for both sides? Where are the articles where the voices on these sites use their power as media outlets to raise the question on “resistance education?”
The path to those multi-dimensions you wrote about where lie our real places of closeness (e.g. religious life vs western values) at this moment walks squarely through the gates of nationalism. Thats the language most of us here are still playing- as idiotic as it seems to those who came from the identity politic world. I’d say that for a healthy most of Jewish Israelis- state sovereignty as a Jewish state is not something we’re going to get over just because its 2013 already. And that’s before the religious zionists…
And on the Palestinian side, it seems all those who have something to gain by it (politrixians/ business), or have swallowed the liberation doctrines of the past 60 years (intellectual elites and activists) are firm in the nationalist paradigm. I wish it wasn’t so– but thats where any political conversation goes.
as far as what am i doing with my prayer…
praying. and trying to talk with people- listen and share why a Jew has no other place in the world to come HOME to… and here how a Palestinian has no place like HOME. And what can we do to make life better that doesn’t involve negating ourself, people or history- nor betray the blood thats been spilled…

By: Vicky

Vicky — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:12:33 +0000

The child’s principal invited the Israeli couple into class, so quite clearly her school was making an effort to show the students that Israelis exist outside of uniform. Secondly, the girl was about seven years old at the time. Even supposing she had got beyond first or second grade and was precociously reading the daily newspaper, how could a textbook or a TV program counterbalance the much more visceral lessons that she gets from her daily life? You underestimate those. Given that in the past you have explicitly conflated Israeli presence with Israeli power (arguing that home demolitions and forced displacement are essential to the welfare of Israel, for example), it’s a bit rich of you to criticise that girl’s teachers or indeed anyone else for not trying hard enough to liberate your symbols on your behalf from the very associations that your own politics reinforce.

As for your last sentence, that’s a perfect example of the type of binary thinking I was talking about. The distinction between nationalism and liberation has huge implications structurally, as it allows us to focus on rights rather than on states – and not just the rights of a community as a whole, but on rights within that community (e.g. women, disabled people, etc). This is a pretty common approach in feminist peace work worldwide, and it has a clear and obvious advantage: it invites connection with the same groups in Israeli society. Nationalist discourse typically presents the two communities as sharp distinct parallel lines that don’t ever meet, while this approach has them looking more like concentric circles. This creates a pretty effective basis for intercultural and interfaith education (which I do agree is very important) as it adequately reflects the fact that there are multiple different experiences and histories within any given community.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 18:22:46 +0000

Well the writer makes it clear that he opposes the very existence of Israel. Look how horrified he is at the idea that Israel would be about the return of the Jewish people to their homeland.

Muslims have 40 states is something he understands and agrees with. Jews having one is a danger.

Its so easy to see Jew hatred when the writer makes it so clear.

By: Kolumn9

Kolumn9 — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:52:20 +0000

The supramajority accepts and has always accepted the security argument. The status quo isn’t going to break because Israelis accept the argument that their security should be undermined in favor of an agreement with people that reject the idea of security for Israelis a priori.

By: Kolumn9

Kolumn9 — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:53:51 +0000

She could have learned differently from her schooling or from her media. She didn’t apparently. You ask ridiculous questions and expect to get away with it.

When you see symbols, how do you know what they mean outside of their immediate context? Again, education and media.

This is precisely the issue. You are arguing from the position of this being some kind of natural and inevitable thing that the Palestinians have absolutely no exposure to any information about Jews as a people and about the significance of Israel to them. It isn’t. It is a conscious choice by their leadership and cultural authorities to deny any significance to the symbols used by the Jews and the IDF and to leave their people in a state of ignorance about who the other side is and why they are on the land.

Palestinians don’t just argue against the connection between Judaism and the state of Israel. They consistently (including their highest leadership) argue against the connection between Judaism and Jerusalem and Judaism and the land of Israel. No, I do not see their reasoning.

Also, the significance between Palestinian liberation and Palestinian nationalism is only relevant to you. It has no structural significance when you support Palestinian nationalism in practice.

By: Nikki

Nikki — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:19:20 +0000

great article and quite on point

By: Greg Pollock

Greg Pollock — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 06:08:36 +0000

A One State outcome seems likely to generate increasing tension both in the Bank and Israel proper. The only “solution” to this seems to be a religious ideology, which would approve the apartheid and religious exemption/study. Apartheid might then be seen as another manefestation of a repressive social ideology within Israel itself. Because apartheid will be defined as essential for national security, I would expect dissent within Israel to be increasing pressed down as destabalizing to security. The religous bond being foraged politically will ultimately mandate conforming speech and politics. Occupation of 1.7 million will dictate compliance at home. Because I don’t believe a supra-majority of Israelis will accept this (which is what you need to pretend free speech), I see no easy way out at all.

As I’ve advocated on this Site, uncritical acceptance of vanguard Torah Ideology settlements, with blanket IDF protection, effectively attaches this ideology to the State. What the State allows becomes normal, expected, demanded. Justice Louis Brandeis of the US once said that the State is the great exemplar. By nurturing the vanguard settlements, the State as accepted them into mainstream political discourse.