+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

The social protest and the inescapable Arab-Jewish conflict

As events at the Rothschild tent camp have recently demonstrated, whether the J14 movement likes it or not, it is forced to engage with the Palestinian issue

By Noam Sheizaf and Mairav Zonszein | originally published on Dissent Magazine

Kahane follower Itamar Ben Gvir arguing with leftwing protesters that demand their expulsion from the tent camp. Tel Aviv, August 4 2011 (photo: Oren Ziv/ Activestills.org)

What started as a protest about housing prices in Tel Aviv nearly a month ago has morphed into a far-reaching and diverse movement calling for changes in the socioeconomic structure of nearly every aspect of life in Israel, from education and welfare to LGBT and freelancer rights. Yet, although Arab Israelis are taking a part in the protests and author Odeh Bishart was a speaker at the 200,000-strong protest in Tel Aviv last Saturday, one issue has been avoided: the relation between Jews and Palestinians—even though this is normally the single most critical issue in Israeli political life, be it in the form of Israel’s Knesset legislation regarding the rights of non-Jewish citizens or the diplomatic and security aspects involved in the forty-four-year occupation of the West Bank.

Some have claimed that the social protests taking place have nothing to with such questions, or that dealing with them would hurt the movement’s ability to reach a consensus among the various groups taking part in it, but events have had their own way of proving those holding this notion wrong.

Protesters on Rothschild Boulevard had to actively confront the Palestinian-Jewish question with the appearance last week of Kahanist activists Baruch Marzel and Itamar Ben-Gvir, accompanied by hilltop youth. These uninvited guests brought with them two messages to add to the protest: “Tel Aviv is only for Jews,” and the solution to the housing crisis can be solved by building in the West Bank (in Hebrew, this is very catchy: “pitaron” (solution) and Yehuda ve’Shomron (Judea and Samaria) rhyme).

Most Israelis rarely if ever visit the West Bank, and thus are seldom forced to confront the views or demeanor of people like Marzel and Ben-Gvir. Out of sight is truly out of mind. In this sense, the presence of Kahanists in Tel Aviv actually makes the Israeli public confront social justice and equal rights apart from security issues, and outside the context of the occupation. The Kahanists’ presence has forced the tent protestors—most of whom have a center-left orientation—to respond, and indeed there have been minor clashes and confrontations between the two sides in recent days. The tent camp’s assembly has decided to ban racist slogans from the protest, but to allow Kahanists to pitch their tents, mainly due to the lack of any legal, nonviolent way to evict them.

Another tent, called “Tent 1948,” a small Palestinian-Jewish compound at the corner of Hashmonaim Street, is challenging the protest movement from the left, by reminding people of land issues that followed 1948, insisting that democracy cannot apply only to Jews, and calling for equal distribution of land and the recognition of Bedouin villages. Tent 1948 draws the connection between economic policies—especially ones dealing with real estate—and the Palestinian-Jewish question. So far, the tent has largely been welcomed into the protest, suggesting that the residents of the Rothschild tent camp prefer their egalitarian message to that of Jewish supremacy in the Land of Israel. At the same time, there were reports of requests by the camp organizers to refrain from having Palestinian flags at the tents.

The events surrounding these two tent camps—the Kahanists and Tent 1948—convey an important lesson for those who wish to carry the social justice message forward in the months and years to come: Dealing with the relationship between Arabs and Jews, past, present, and future, is simply unavoidable. Every aspect of life in this country—from the distribution of resources to more trivial matters like food, music, and outdoor activities—contains elements of the Jewish-Palestinian relationship in it. In the words of Israeli poet Meir Ariel, “at the end of every sentence in Hebrew, even one beginning in Russia or in Hollywood, sits an Arab.” People may talk about things that seem unrelated to the conflict, but they will inevitably arrive at that point.

The protesters’ call on the government to assume responsibility for the welfare of all its citizens necessarily calls attention not only to the marginalized lower and middle classes, but also to Palestinian citizens’ relations with the state—not to mention those Palestinians who are subject to Israeli control but are not even citizens. As the residents of the Tel Aviv tent camp are learning, without addressing those questions, social justice cannot be re-imagined or expanded.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. One thing that characterizes Kahanist views is that they seek to exclude those that don’t fit their definition.

      The theme of the “social” vs “political” distinction is that the social definition is chosen to be optimally inclusive. ANY organization, any statement that shifts the theme of the demonstration from a big tent “us” (“we are seeking our collective well-being”) to a small tent “us/them” (“we are seeking ONLY the well-being and privilege of some definition of who is ‘we’), distracts from and conflicts with the movement itself.

      There is an “us” of the movement though, and that is Israelis (all of them) as distinct from non-Israeli Palestinians.

      A movement that seeks a solution to housing problems, solved by some vibrant and affordable housing, as distinct from advocating for a specific claim, can get divisive.

      The assertion of restoration of prior property rights, conflicts with a socialist movement.

      The affirmation of the rule of law is ironically more consistent with a propertarian approach, though not the ethnically exclusive one.

      Reply to Comment
    2. David

      Unfortunately, the Kahanists are right. Tel Aviv, like everywhere in Israel, *is* only for Jews. The fact that Arabs barely register on the political, personal, social, or ethical Richter scale says much about the entire society. I know a number of progressive Jews in Israel, but I’m beginning to think I’ve met all there are to meet. As a Jew, it’s hard to work up any enthusiasm for this Jim Crow, if not Apartheid, state.

      Reply to Comment
    3. The broader exposure of Palestinian issues at tonight’s “peripheral” protests merely adds to the force of this article. Not only where Arab-Jewish groups spread throughout the various locations, with the requite signs, but some sites had multiple Arab speakers who addressed geopolitical issues. This is unavoidable. The question is this: will such an expansion change public support? Have we crossed a momentum threshold where such a question need not be asked anymore?

      Reply to Comment
    4. I was the first to publicly declare war on the Kahanist tent in Rothschild, by opening a facebook event that very quickly gained close to a 1,000 attends, and culminated in the “Equality Tents” which were planted on the “occupied territory” of the Kahanists in the corner of Allenby while they were away for the Sabbath. The “battle” is ongoing and myself and my friends Tamar and Dana have tried to keep it restrained. I’d like to comment that I generally agree with and approve of this post, despite its overly condescending tone. Your most salient point is of course that the call for “Social Justice” is of course inalienably political, and that it cannot but address the Arab issue or it loses its consistency and coherence. Baruch Marzel’s racist messages cannot be part of the protest because there simply is no room for racism under the banner of social justice. Faced with the the matter of Palestinians, the tent protest has to accommodate their demand for justice or else it is exposed as hypocritical. I may be optimistic but I believe a growing number of Israelis are coming to understand this.

      Reply to Comment
    5. @Daniel: I’m sorry it if you find the tone of this article condescending. I congratulate and support your actions against the Kahanists.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Moriel Rothman

      Noam and Mairav– thank you for this piece, and for all of your insightful analyses over the past few weeks. That Meir Ariel quote is amazing– could you point me to the poem/song/piece it is from?

      Reply to Comment
    7. ARTH

      yes, at the end of every sentence in Hebrew,even one beginning in Russian or Hollywood, sits an Arab, but who wants to complete the sentence?

      Reply to Comment
    8. Moriel Rothman

      Noam– If we look at these protests as songs of pain in their own right, maybe Meir Ariel’s chorus also fits… Even if the song hasn’t yet found the right key, maybe it will?

      A song of pain, that goes and comes

      What luck that I am singing now

      A song of pain, that always returns

      So I am singing now, maybe it will help

      Reply to Comment