The Forum > Article Comments > After Lebanon: a personal reflection on Israel and Palestine > Comments
After Lebanon: a personal reflection on Israel and Palestine : Comments
By Philip Mendes, published 13/11/2006There is a huge cultural gulf between Israeli and Palestinian concepts of peace.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Page 10
- 11
-
- All
Posted by sganot, Tuesday, 5 December 2006 11:53:15 PM
| |
Sganot,
No English dictionary provide a word “desantnik” as an English word-and translating it directly into “Special Marine Force” sounds to me much more stupid and rude –in general context, than “paratrooper”. It makes me wondering why you have omitted an article from the same Israeli site in the same language provided where a story of Menashem and controversy them surrounding have been provided? If you were able to read this in origin, I am once more wondering why do you try to explain that there are “Indian Jews” but not Hasidim from India? To further broaden your knowledge of a topic I would like to inform that this New York NGO was headed by a Rabbi of India, as he called himself, he had come from India and those who I knew from this UN-registered NGO were Hasidim-American and Indian-born. So, no point to continue, but to read something more close to a topic: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1164881816798&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull And I do not catch this math: “~73% of Israelis are native-born. Most, whether native or immigrant, are of MidEastern descent. ~32% of Israelis are of European-American origin” Fellow Human, I do support establishment of a state of the Arabs of Palestine, but I try understanding your playing with wording of “Palestinians want to restore their country rather than becoming 'arabs of Israel'”: there are the Israeli Arabs and they are free citizens of a free democratic country which is Israel.Such, they can migrate wherever they want-as they and their fellow Jewish co-citizens do recently, in the US or Palestinian Authority, if they pretend not knowing that they are hatred there little less than other Israelis… Posted by MichaelK., Wednesday, 6 December 2006 12:18:27 AM
| |
MichaelK,
I don’t know how to represent Cyrillic characters here, so I transliterated the caption “Americansky desant”. It is my understanding that “paratrooper” is actually “desantnik” (again, transliterated into Latin characters). If I am wrong, I apologize. No, I don’t speak Russian. Special Marine Force? I don’t know where you came up with that. Maybe you think it's "stupid and rude", but it isn't anything I said. ... I’ve simply never heard of Hassidim from India. Rabbis? Of course! But not Hassidic rabbis. Modern Hassidut is basically a European, Ashkenazi phenomenon. Certainly, individual Jews of Indian origin may have joined one of the Hassidic groups since coming into contact with them. Today, there are individual Chabadniks from Addis Ababa, Breslovers from Yemen, and no doubt some Jews from Moscow who follow Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, so why not a handful of Hassidim from India, too? I've just never heard of any. Well, if such a group exists, thanks for telling me about them :) Are you sure, though, that you are not confusing Orthodox or religious or traditional or whatever with "Hassidic"? Re the math, I derived the numbers from the Statistical Abstract of Israel 2006: ~73% of Israelis are native-born: First, I assume that all or nearly all of the 1,358,700 Arab Israelis (see http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton57/st02_01.pdf ) are native born. To these, I add the 3,672,000 Israel-born “Jews and others” (i.e., Jews plus non-Arab Christians and those not classified by religion) (see http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton57/st02_24.pdf ). Altogether, 5,030,700 out of a total population of 6,930,100 (72.6%) are native born. ~32% of Israelis are of European-American origin: First, I assume that no Arab Israelis are of European-American origin. This isn’t quite accurate, but close enough. From http://www1.cbs.gov.il/shnaton57/st02_24.pdf, 2,215,300 “Jews and others” (i.e., 32% of Israel’s total population) are of European-American origin. By the way, this includes 805,500 who are Israel-born Israelis whose fathers were born in Europe-America, plus another 1,409,800 who were themselves born abroad. Posted by sganot, Wednesday, 6 December 2006 1:57:56 AM
| |
I think further deliberation of philological meanings as well as whose tsatses are more holy are out of this topic, sganot.
To me, Your clarification of Israeli ethnic statistics testifies significantly to big tasks ahead on a way to a homogenious Israeli society where establishing the outer Arabic state in Palestine is a step in a right direction. Posted by MichaelK., Wednesday, 6 December 2006 5:21:07 PM
| |
hmmm
I was just giving an opinion I wasn't aware it turning into a analysts debate on Israeli demography:) All I am saying be fair to your fellow citizens whether arabs or Jews. I can't see it in Australia that people are living in fancy houses and keeping the remaining part in tents living under a dollar a day. Its just not human. I lost nterest in the details of how and who did what but 50 years later this scenario is still there. Peace, Posted by Fellow_Human, Friday, 8 December 2006 11:45:58 AM
| |
MichaelK,
1. My description of Chassidut as a European phenomenon generally not found among Indian Jews not a value judgment about anyone’s holiness. I don't regard Chassidim as "holier" than non-Chassidim. 2. I doubt if many Israelis wish for a homogenous society; I certainly don’t. Establishing an Arab state of Palestine is probably a good idea, but not because it will make Israel more homogenous; it won’t. Fellow_Human, “Be fair to your fellow citizens” – of course, I agree. But no, this isn't all you said. You said much more, some of which I agree with, and some of which I don’t. No one in Israel is kept in tents or living on $1 a day. Yes, we have poverty and income gaps, but our situation isn’t so different from yours. While in general, analogies comparing Arab Israelis to the indigenous peoples of colonized lands are inappropriate and unhelpful, here it may be somewhat enlightening. Among both Aboriginal Australians and Arab Israelis, ~50% live under their countries’ respective poverty lines. In both communities, the poverty rate is ~3X that of the majority population. In both cases, by various measures, average incomes are ~50-67% of the national average. The median income of Aboriginal families is 68% of that of other Australian families. The average salary of Arab Israelis is 71% of that of Jewish Israelis. In some important ways, Arab Israelis are significantly better off than Aboriginal Australians. For example, the unemployment rate of Aboriginal Australians is ~3X the national rate; that of Arab Israelis is ~1.5X the national rate. I could find no hard data about Aboriginal literacy, but I gather that it’s quite low. The literacy rate among Israeli Arabs is 95% -- about the same as for Israeli Jews. Life expectancy of Aboriginal Australians is ~62 years (17 less than the rest of the population); life expectancy of Arab Israelis is ~77 years (4 less than the rest of the population). Infant mortality among Aboriginal Australians is 13.1 per 1000 births (2.62X the national average); among Arab Israelis, it is 8.5 per 1000 births (1.55X the national average). Posted by sganot, Friday, 8 December 2006 5:33:48 PM
|
~73% of Israelis are native-born. Most, whether native or immigrant, are of MidEastern descent. ~32% of Israelis are of European-American origin; the rest are from Israel, other parts of Asia, and Africa –mainly from the MidEast.
Why does this matter? It sounds like denial, dismissal, and delegitimization of the presence of European-American Jews – in general, the Ashkenazim. Jews from Casablanca (4000 km from Jerusalem) and Algiers (2984 km) are OK, but from Bucharest (1606 km) and Odessa (1678 km) are not? If your ancestors came from Iran in 1980, you're OK, but if from Lithuania in 1780, you're not?
Those who protest European Jewish immigration tend to posit a close biological/genetic tie between Arabs and Sefardim, which Ashkenazim supposedly lack. It’s a false argument. As I wrote in another thread, overwhelming evidence shows that both Ashkenazim and Sefardim are closely related to Syrians, Palestinians, Lebanese, etc. One study indicates that Sefardim are more closely related to Europeans than are Ashkenazim, and concludes that "Ashkenazim are not closely related to their Central and Eastern European neighbors or to any group outside the Middle East or Near East." There is also evidence that Ashkenazim are more closely related to Palestinian Arabs and other MidEasterners than are Sefardim, though the two Jewish groups are closest to each other, and both are closer to other MidEasterners and Mediterraneans than to Northern/Eastern Europeans.
Re “citizenship of will”, the main problem is the opposite of what you describe.
Since the 1930s, most Jews have supported partition – a compromise that would allow both sides to fulfill their aspirations for statehood on part of their homeland, rather than forcing one to live as a minority under the other’s rule. Most Palestinian Arabs have rejected partition. This pattern repeated itself from the 1936 Peel Commission to the 1947 UN Partition Plan to the 2000/2001 Camp David/Taba negotiations. Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was another step designed to encourage coexistence. The Palestinian response was to elect a Muslim-fundamentalist government that seeks to continue “armed struggle” until all of Israel is “liberated”, i.e., destroyed.