Zionism and Libertarians

Miscellaneous General
201

Tartan,

Sorry you feel you’re not convincing many on this forum. Maybe the cause you’re defending is a lost cause.

Concerning my criticism of Israel I was careful to document everything I said and I used mostly Israeli sources as anyone who read my posts can verify for themselves.

Concerning Jordan I didn’t ignore what you said, I responded to it, here is what I said:

“Concerning Jordan, here are the facts:

Modern Jordan was founded in 1921, and it was recognized by the League of Nations as a state under the British mandate in 1922 known as The Emirate of Transjordan. The Transjordan memorandum excluded the territories east of the River Jordan from all of the provisions of the mandate dealing with Jewish settlement.The country remained under British supervision until 1946.In 1946, Jordan joined the United Nations as an independent sovereign state officially known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. See: [ View : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan#British_protectorate_of_Transjordan]

So trying to bring Jordan into the mix is intellectually dishonest.”

Jews did not have a presence in Jordan, did not own land in Jordan. So why bring up Jordan? You brought Jordan into the mix to make it look like the Jews only got a small piece of Palestine when in reality the Israelis took 78% of Palestine and they are still haggling with the Palestinians over the remaining 22%.

As for Israel being racist, it’s a fact and I brought proof of that. I didn’t manufacture those facts.

It’s Israel’s behavior that makes Israel look bad and pro-Israel propagandists can no longer hide the ugly truth about Israel. If Israel wants to change the way people see it it needs to change its policies.

Israelis should get over the “boo hoo why does the world hate us?” mantra and look objectively at themselves and what they are doing.

I want to finish by saying that I am not singling out Israel. As I said in an earlier post,

"The topic here was about libertarianism and zionism that’s why I talked about Zionism. If the topic was about Bahrein for example or China or Turkey I would have criticized their mistreatment of their minorities with the same severity as I criticized Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. You see many Zionists think the whole world is antisemitic as if there’s is something in the genes of gentiles who makes them irrationally hate the Jews. That’s not true for the most part.

Actually many intellectuals criticized the French war in Algeria, America’s involvement in Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge’s massacres in Cambodia, China’s occupation of Tibet, Sudan’s crimes in Darfour etc. So Israel is not singled out for criticism as many of Israel’s supporters claim.

The problem with Israel’s supporters is that they want Israel to get a special treatment, some sort of moral dispensation based on Jewish historical suffering and that’s not right.

I don’t see why it’s ok to criticize the US, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Serbia, Russia, China etc. but not Israel."

202

Why do they have every right?

As the jews are not technically a race, as there is only one race, the human race. Judaism is just a belief system and a culture, much like Amish or Catholics etc. This would be par to the Catholics in America, deciding that they have every right to create their own state in a region of the USA.

203

JB, the reason I mentioned Jordan is because I thought it was important to note that the Palestinians are a majority there and that the entire land of Jordan, which was part of the British Mandate and ruled by the British, was given to the Arabs. I find it interesting that Jews were discouraged from migrating there by the Balfour Declaration and that a minority, British-installed Hashemite minority rule that country. The point I was making (knowing full well that the Partition Plan had nothing to do with Jordan anyway) was that the Jews were given 20-odd% of all the land that the British used to rule (inc. Jordan), that the land they were given was a state split into three parts and made up mostly of barren desert, that Arabs made up 40% of the population of that Jewish state, yet Jews only made 1% of the population of the Arab State, and that the Jews’ state was still regarded as an evil by the Arabs who launched a war against it.

As I say, I’m not debating anymore with propagandists who consider Israel to be a racist state when the evidence points to the contrary (as I’ve provided in this thread). You told me that the citizenship law is racist and I disproved it. We can do it all day but I’ve done it a million times before and I’d rather you did your own research before barging into discussions with your dodgy facts and spurious claims of Jewish supremacy.

Plus I don’t as much think it is you who is ignoring other countries as it is the debate as a whole. You’ve said that you’d criticise Iran etc., which is good. You ask why Israel is immune to criticism yet it quite clearly is not - you’re criticising it now. It is criticised every day. It is by far more criticised than North Korea, and my main problem with the debate as a whole and not just the one between you and I (because, as you say, this is a discussion about Israel so a criticism of North Korea would be out of place) is that Israel is commonly portrayed as the world’s main evil and far more despotic and genuinely racist/fascist states get shoved to the bottom of the list of criticism. I often think that the criticisms of Israel and America, which by far dominate criticisms of Iran and North Korea, for example, are part of the West’s inability to regard itself and its system of Enlightenment values/capitalism as good. Anyway, I digress.

204

Tartan,

Maybe you are just running out of arguments and want to exit the debate in style.

You said: “I’m not debating anymore with propagandists who consider Israel to be a racist state when the evidence points to the contrary (as I’ve provided in this thread).”

Actually the evidence proves Israel is a racist country because it discriminates on the basis of religion and race.

Here’s the Law of Return again:

from the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

[ View : http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/State/Acquisition+of+Israeli+Nationality.htm]

"The Law of Return (1950) grants every Jew, wherever he may be, the right to come to Israel as an (a Jew immigrating to Israel) and become an Israeli citizen.

For the purposes of this Law, “Jew” means a person who was born of a Jewish mother, or has converted to Judaism and is not a member of another religion."

It’s clear that the law of return is based on racial discrimination (you have to have Jewish blood) and/or religious discrimination (and not be a member of another religion). Only a stubborn unconditional supporter of Israel can fail to see that this law discriminates against non Jews.

I am not the only one saying the Law of Return is racist. In fact many Jewish intellectuals say it’s racist too. Actually many Jews throughout the world have renounced their right of return on moral grounds.Take this petition for exemple:

"ANTI-RACIST AUSTRALIAN JEWS: Israeli “law of return” “racist” & “abets the colonial oppression of the Palestinians”

We are Jews from Australia, who, like Jewish people throughout the world, have an automatic right to Israeli citizenship under Israel’s “law of return.” While this law may seem intended to enable a Jewish homeland, we submit that it is in fact a form of racist privilege that abets the colonial oppression of the Palestinians.

Today there are more than seven million Palestinian refugees around the world. Israel denies their right to return to their homes and land—a right recognized and undisputed by UN Resolution 194, the Geneva Convention, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Meanwhile, we are invited to live on that same land simply because we are Jewish, thereby potentially taking the place of Palestinians who would dearly love to return to their ancestral lands.

We renounce this “right” to “return” offered to us by Israeli law. It is not right that we may “return” to a state that is not ours while Palestinians are excluded and continuously dispossessed.

Signed:

Professor Peter Singer – Princeton University
Miriam Margolyes (OBE) – renowned actor
Eva Cox (AO) – National Chair of the Women’s Electoral Lobby.
Professor Dennis Altman – Professor of Politics, La Trobe University
Professor Andrew Benjamin – Monash University
Sara Dowse – writer
GJ Lindell – Adjunct Professor of Law, University of Adelaide
Susan Varga – writer
Antony Loewenstein – writer, journalist, author of My Israel Question
Professor David SG Goodman – Professor of Chinese Politics, University of Sydney
Professor John Docker – Sydney University
Jean McClean – advisor to Vice-Chancellor at Victoria University on East-Timor
Dr Peter Slezak – University of New South Wales
Dr Tony Balint – Blue Horizon Clinic
Dr Ron Witton – University of Wollongong
Dr Ned Curthoys – Australian National University
Dr Rick Kuhn – Australian National University
Dr. Tamas Pataki
Russell Bancroft – Manager Industrial Relations, Government Branch
Alice Beauchamp
Toni Beauchamp
Wendy Crew
Bronwyn Dahlstrom
Nicole Erlich – PhD candidate, University of Queensland
Marshall Harris
David Hermolin
Sylvie Leber
Jeffrey Loewenstein
Stefan Moore
Martin Munz
Vivienne Porzsolt
Joe Rich
Margot Salom
Rene Tsukasov
Nic Witton." [1].

See petition here:

[ View : http://sites.google.com/site/jewsagainstracistzionism/antiracist-australian-jews]

Here’s another petition from a group of British Jews:

"We are Jews, born and raised outside Israel, who, under Israel’s “law of return”, have a legal right to Israeli residence and citizenship (Real lives, G2, August 7). We wish to renounce this unsought “right” because:

  1. We regard it as morally wrong that this legal entitlement should be bestowed on us while the very people who should have most right to a genuine “return”, having been forced or terrorised into fleeing, are excluded.

  2. Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians are barbaric - we do not wish to identify ourselves in any way with what Israel is doing.

  3. We disagree with the notion that Zionist emigration to Israel is any kind of “solution” for diaspora Jews, anti-semitism or racism - no matter to what extent Jews have been or are victims of racism, they have no right to make anyone else victims.

  4. We wish to express our solidarity with all those who are working for a time when Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip can be lived in by people without any restrictions based on so-called racial, cultural, or ethnic origins.

We look forward to the day when all the peoples of the area are enabled to live in peace with each other on this basis of non-discrimination and mutual respect. Perhaps some of us would even wish to live there, but only if the rights of the Palestinians are respected. To those who consider Israel a “safe haven” for Jews in the face of anti-semitism, we say that there can be no safety in taking on the role of occupier and oppressor. We hope that the people of Israel and their leaders will come to realise this soon."
Michael RosenIan Saville
Prof Irene Bruegel
Michael Kustow
Mike Marqusee
Prof Steven Rose
Leon Rosselson
and 38 others

Source: [ View : http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2002/aug/08/guardianletters4]

A group of US Jews started a facebook page called “Breaking the Law of Return” see here:

[ View : http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=296967332350]

The Law of Return is only one example of Israeli racism. Those who want to see more examples of Israeli mistreatment and discrimination against its minorities can go to the website of The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel (ADALAH)

[ View : http://www.adalah.org/eng/]

205

Also the Palestinians are a majority in Jordan because Jordan absorbed the majority of the Palestinians who were expelled by the Zionist in 1948 and again in 1967. Stop torturing the facts Tartan!

BTW can you confirm that a guide to killing non-Jews was published recently in Israel?

The book was published by a West Bank settler rabbi under the title “The King’s Torah.” The book offers far-reaching guidance on when and under what circumstances it is permissable for Jews to kill non-Jews (including children)

A shocking excerpt:

"There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us"

[ View : http://coteret.com/2009/11/09/settler-rabbi-publishes-the-complete-guide-to-killing-non-jews/]

Maariv, the leading Israeli newpaper, reviewed the book. You can read a full English translation of the Maariv article originally written in Hebrew here:

[ View : http://peacenow.org/entries/settler_rabbis_guide_to_killing_non-jews]

An article on the book and the power of the religious right in Israel:

[ View : http://www.alternet.org/world/148016/?page=entire]

See also this video:

[ View : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_LxpCY2G8&feature=player_embedded]

206

If anyone is waiting on my reply to JB’s points on the Law of Return and Ehud Olmert’s comments, they can look back a few pages to where I already countered these points, which JB has obviously completely ignored. This seems to support my belief that hardly a word I say is being read by JB. No matter how much opinion he quotes from Jews, it does not change the facts.

And I’m not going to entertain the notion that Israel is racist because one of its citizens published a seemingly racist book. That’s just absurd.

207

That is a good comparison. Yes the Catholics in America have the right to create their own state. Since one person is free to break away and form a state for himself then so are groups of people. May that group be of Jews, Catholics, or pizza-makers.

208

The language you use is distasteful. Can I give you your own house? The British did not give anything to Arabs. That land was always Arab.

Maybe you can play with percentages some more by pointing out Arabs should be happy since they got 99% of the Arab world back. Except an owner is entitled to 100% of his property, not 99%.

Which is totally irrelevant when we are talking about right and wrong. It was still more than what the would-be Israelis were entitled to. They were being assigned control of land they did not own against the wishes of the actual property owners.

This is some Stalinesque logic. The war was launched to liberate the 40% Arabs from being included into a Jewish state they did not wish to be a part of. That the Jewish state would actually be only 55% Jewish does not make it morally superior. It makes it into a moral outrage. It means it is a colonial state established against the will of 40-45% of its population who have to be kept in it by force. On the other hand the 99% Arab Arab state would have been a much smaller agressor, forcing itself on merely 10,000 unwilling citizens.

209

Because the problem is Palestinians being denied their right to self-determination. Depriving the Israelis of self-determination as well does not bring us closer to resolution, but further away from it.

210

Tartan said: “If anyone is waiting on my reply to JB’s points on the Law of Return and Ehud Olmert’s comments, they can look back a few pages to where I already countered these points**, which JB has obviously completely ignored. This seems to support my belief that hardly a word I say is being read by JB”**

Tartan, I read what you wrote I just didn’t find it convincing.

Tartan said: “No matter how much opinion he quotes from Jews, it does not change the facts.

And I’m not going to entertain the notion that Israel is racist because one of its citizens published a seemingly racist book. That’s just absurd.”

Of course you are not going to change your mind, after all Zionist believes are based on myths not on reality.

211

People are not technically free to create a state, as all land apart from a few islands already has a state. Any group of people, even pizza-makers that try to create a state, can not create a state without aggression. Much like when we talk about the communist utopia of the venus project and we say that it is not possible to create their systems without aggression. Similar, it is not possible to create a state of isreal without aggression. Even if they created a state of isreal and were completely tolerant of every ethnic group and did not ethnic cleanse the region. They would still have to aggress against the inhabitants of the region in order to create their state. Now if they decided to create a state in an unpopulated area like the middle of the sahara desert, then I could agree that the act of creating a state would not be an act of aggression, as there would be no inhabitants to aggress against.

212

There is indeed nothing wrong with the Law of Return as such. Now it is silly to call it that since in no way can say an Ethiopian Jew be said to be “returning” to the Middle East, but that is internal Israeli business.

It is only noteable in the way it higlights the contrast where Jewish converts from Peru may come to Israel and purchase a plot of land which is ostensibly “state owned” after some Arab was expropriated 60 years ago. But the descendents of this same Arab are barred from returning to their family’s land, and even from settling anywhere else within Israeli borders.

It is not a unique situation. In a number of countries in East Europe there is a similar situation in regard to the Germans expelled 60 years ago.

It is difficult to say that “Israel is commonly portrayed as the world’s main evil”. Depends on the time and place. In some circles it is. In others it is upheld as a paragon of virtue and supported to the hilt while the Arab Middle Easterners’ are presented as evil personified. In still others it is not even a topic of conversation. It is difficult to generalise. The only generalization that can be made is that the sum of information and interpretation out there is not one sided. Both takes on the issue manage to get out and to find an audience. In contrast there are very few voices out there arguing for the North Korean point of view.

The Israel-Palestine and North Korea situations are not comparable. Authoritarianism of North Korea exists to the detriment of nobody else but Koreans. It is an internal Korean matter how they deal with that. The same can not be said of Israel. Israel’s colonialist policies do not come at the expense of Israelis alone, they come chiefly at the expense of non-Israelis, namely the Palestinian Arabs. It can not be said Israel’s conduct is nobody’s busines but that of Israelis. It is also the business of all Palestinians/Arabs. It is only natural that an international conflict will attract more attention than internal affairs of a nationaly homogenous country.

213

Not if it included only the property of the creators of the state, but did not claim authorithy over any additional inhabitants and their property.

214

I don’t believe I did. Let me repeat what you wrote verbatim:

To me, you seemed to be implying that, indeed, no one among the Palestinian Arabs had a radio, read newspapers, etc. I was taking the phrase “people who don’t have radios, don’t read newspapers, etc.” at their face value. Why would I do otherwise?

Yet if the Palestinian Arabs desired statehood (and apparently they had made this desire known before 1947), why did Egypt and Jordan also occupy lands that would’ve gone to the Palestinian Arab state under the UN Partition Plan? A related question is, why do you see only two possible choices there - either occupy the land outright, or withdraw from it and watch as Israel takes it over wholesale?

I don’t understand this referring to the Hashemites as if they’re some separate ethnic group. They aren’t. Again, as Wikipedia notes, the Hashemites are Arabs.

Also, can you please explain what you mean by “Arab Cause”? Because, in the eyes of Western statists, if lands where Arabs live are governed by Arabs, isn’t that enough? What else does (your definition of) the “Arab Cause” entail?

215

Fine, have it your way. I said they had no radios, but actually they had a few. So what now? My point was they didn’t have much in way of modern political organisation and consciousness. Having a few radios between them doesn’t change that.

Egyptian soldiers were welcome as far as Palestinian Arabs were concerned so I don’t see how they being there should be an issue for us.

That were the only choices. Arabs of Palestine alone were no match for Israel.

I am referring to the Hashemites as a dynasty which is incidentally exactly what they are. I don’t know that ethnic groups have “personal interests”. I am pointing out actions of Jordan are in line with the percieved interests of its ruling dynasty, which is out for itself only.

So why are Jordanian (that is Hashemite) motives for annexing the West Bank relevant to anything? And why exactly is it a mystery to you that official Jordan should screw the Palestinians? Black September doesn’t ring a bell?

Arab Cause is the cause of de-colonisation in the Arab world. Undermining de-colonization in Palestine is hardly compatible with it.

216

Wrapping it up

In my earlier posts I showed how Israel was born in “sin” from a Libertarian point of view. The Zionists used violence to dispossess and brutalize an indigenous population and build a country on a land that in great part did not belong to them. The dispossession and brutalization of the Palestinians continue to this day. It is clear that Zionism (= violence and dispossession ) in its current form is incompatible with Libertarianism (non-violence and respect of private property), and that is why Libertarians in general are against Zionism.

217

I never said that or implied it. Palestinians, like all people, deserve peace and freedom, but they can’t have that because most of their population support setting up islamic laws. And that’s why I said Hamas so I wouldn’t generalize them, but I highly doubt that there are any arabs in the area that support anything secular. Hamas, whether you want to know it or not, are not freedom fighters. They are a militia group that want their own governemnt so they can rule over people, and to get that they will use violent means, just like the IDF that some of you guys condemn. Now I condemn all violence that come from all poeple. That inculdes Israel. I don’t give people a slide, both big guy and little guy. No excuses. I know killing is a fast way to do it, but it’s not the right way. Never has. And I refuse to support any group or what ever that condones the use of violence as a means to get your way.

And I wonder how many of the anti-Israeli side have ever had sympathy for the non-combatant Israeli who was killed in the name of Palestine. And not because they felt the actions of Israel caused it and thought “that damn Israeli government,” but because someone’s life was taken because some asshole idealist didn’t mind killing a another human being out of some selfish cause.

Edit: And damn it. I can’t get this thing to quote.

218

You say: “I never said that or implied it. Palestinians, like all people, deserve peace and freedom, but they can’t have that because most of their population support setting up islamic laws”

If a majority of Palestinians want to follow Islamic law they should be allowed to do so as long as they don’t try to impose it on others. But where’s the proof that most of Palestinians favor an Islamic state?

You say: “I highly doubt that there are any arabs in the area that support anything secular”

Again where is the proof? Arab protesters throughout the Middle East are asking for more freedom and democracy not an Islamic state.

“Hamas, whether you want to know it or not, are not freedom fighters. They are a militia group that want their own governemnt so they can rule over people, and to get that they will use violent means”

Hamas is a resistance movement that fights for liberating Palestinian land from Israeli occupation. Like most liberation movements they resort to violence and sometimes to terrorism. Just like the early Zionists who blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem and assassinated UN envoy Count Folke Bernadotte.

“And I refuse to support any group or what ever that condones the use of violence as a means to get your way.”

That’s you right. But remember that American patriots used violence to drive the British out, resistance movements against the Nazis used violence, early Zionists used violence, Vietnamese used violence etc. Hardly any people ever freed themselves from occupation without resorting to some kind of violence.

“And I wonder how many of the anti-Israeli side have ever had sympathy for the non-combatant Israeli who was killed in the name of Palestine. And not because they felt the actions of Israel caused it”

Loss of human life is always a tragedy. Actually most of those who otherwise support the Palestinian struggle for freedom oppose their use of terrorism. Palestinians know that and that’s why they are starting to consider other non-violent means of resistance.

If you hear more condemnation of Israeli killing of Palestinians it’s because there are many more Palestinians killed by Israelis than Israelis killed by Palestinians.

Actually since the year 2000:

  • 1,463 Palestinian children were killed by Israelis vs 124 Israeli children killed by Palestinians
  • 6,430 Palestinians killed vs 1,084 Israelis killed
  • 45,041 Palestinian injured vs 9,226 Israeli injured

[ View : http://www.ifamericansknew.org/]

Also see for example what Israel did in Gaza in 2008:

Instructions to Israeli soldiers before the Gaza invasion in 2008:

“We were told: ‘ any sign of danger, open up with massive fire’” (member of a reconnaissance company); “We shot at anything that moved” (Golani Brigade fighter); “Despite the fact that no one fired on us, the firing and demolitions continued incessantly” (gunner in a tank crew); “If you are not sure-shoot” (soldier recalling his battalion commander’s order); “If you face an area that is hidden by a building-you take down the building. Questions such as ‘who lives in that building?’ are not asked” (soldier recalling his brigade commander’s order); “If the deputy battalion commander thought a house looked suspect, we’d blow it away. If the infantrymen didn’t like the looks of that house-we’d shoot” (unidentified soldier); “As for rules of engagement , the army’s working assumption was that the whole area would be devoid of civilians…Anyone there, as far as the army was concerned, was to be killed” (unidentified soldier); “If you see any signs of movement at all you shoot. This is essentially the rules of engagement”

Beyond the civilian casualties, Israel destroyed or damaged:

  • 58,000 homes
  • 280 schools and kindergartens
  • 1,500 factories and workshops
  • Electrical, water and sewage installations
  • 190 greenhouse complexes
  • 80% of agricultural crops
  • 25% of cultivated land

The Israeli Army killed:

  • More than 1,000,000 birds and chickens
  • 4,000 cattle, sheep and goats

Source: Norman finkelstein, This Time We Went Too Far, revised and expanded edition p. 61-63

See also this article:

The Jewish Chronicle online: Gaza Soldiers speak out

[ View : http://www.thejc.com/news/israel-news/gaza-soldiers-speak-out]

219

Also, here is Israeli journalist Gideon Levy’s verdict on Israel:

“The conclusion is that Israel is a violent and dangerous country, devoid of all restraints and blatantly ignoring the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, while not giving a hoot about international law.”

[ View : http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/gaza-war-ended-in-utter-failure-for-israel-1.268620]

One of the bigger Zionist lies is trying to equate Judaism with Zionism and claiming that Israel speaks for all Jews.

See this article from the Jerusalem Post:

“Sociologists Stephen Cohen and Ari Kelman have now confirmed what everyone already knew: Young American Jews do not care very much about Israel. They are not just apathetic about Israel, that indifference is "giving way to downright alienation,” write Cohen and Kelman."

Read the whole article here: http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=78867

For Jewish anti-zionism see:

International Jewish anti-Zionist Network-http://www.ijsn.net/home/

Jews not Zionists-http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

True Torah Jews Against Israel - http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

Neturei Karta-http://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/opposition.cfm

For Jewish anti-Israel sentiment see:

Jewish Voice for Peace-http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/

Norman Finkelstein-http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/

Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz at MondoWeiss-http://mondoweiss.net/

Richard Silverstein at Tikun-Olam-http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/

Jeremiah Haber at The Magnes Zionist-http://www.jeremiahhaber.com/

Gilad Atzmon-http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/

Israel: the only democracy in the Middle East?- http://theonlydemocracy.org/

220

JB, you made a good point. Maybe I’m just running into the militant supporters. As you can see I rarely see the condemnation of all violent actions.