Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What is so wrong with Zionism? Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    You may wish to check your history. Israel within months of being formed was attacked by the Arabs and then attacked again.

    If your my neighbor and try steal my home but lose, you can't really complain if i take your garden for myself (in the context of no police) since you started the fight.

    Personally i give my full support to Israel. It is a bastion of market democracy in a region full of tyrants, terrorists and no love for the market/liberty.
    Using your analogy, if someone moves into your land (let's say your garden) would you let them stay there? Zionists had no right to take the land of another people in the first place.

    The Palestinians were just defending what was theirs. Before Israel was formed, there were centuries upon centuries of Jews and Muslims living side by side in the same land. The creation of Israel was partly created to allow the West to have free market influence in the Middle East.

    "region full of tyrants, terrorists and no love for the market",
    Lol, that statement is one which suggests strong brainwashing from Israeli controlled media.

    'By this view, if some people aren't paid enough to live on, the market has determined they aren't worth enough. If others rake in billions, they must be worth it. If millions of Americans remain unemployed or their paychecks are shrinking or they work two or three part-time jobs with no idea what they'll earn next month or next week, that's too bad; it's just the outcome of the market

    Who should decide on the rules, and their major purpose? If our democracy was working as it should, presumably our elected representatives, agency heads, and courts would be making the rules roughly according to what most of us want the rules to be. The economy would be working for us; we wouldn't be working for the economy.
    Instead, the rules are being made mainly by those with the power and resources to buy the politicians, regulatory heads, and even the courts (and the lawyers who appear before them). As income and wealth have concentrated at the top, so has political clout. And the most important clout is determining the rules of the game.
    Not incidentally, these are the same people who want you and most others to believe in the fiction of an immutable 'free market".' - Alternet

    Is the market really that great?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by y.u.mad.bro?)
    Blind faith is never good. Who do you think the European Court of Justice will declare a terrorist? Hamas or Netanyahu?
    What I think? I think it's too late to think about it. :cool:

    "Hamas declared a terrorist organisation by the European Court of Justice"
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7860301.html
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    Nothing, particularly, as a concept. It's how it manifests both in the region and the wider world that is (often intensely) problematic :erm:
    For real tho :puke:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Zionism is ethno-nationalism by another name.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    Zionism is ethno-nationalism by another name.
    Nail on the head. The difference is that Zionist ethno-nationalist arguments and claims for whatever reason seem to be treated with much more acceptance and generosity than any other ethno-nationalism.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Nail on the head. The difference is that Zionist ethno-nationalist arguments and claims for whatever reason seem to be treated with much more acceptance and generosity than any other ethno-nationalism.
    Curious isn't it?

    Even when Richard Spencer appears on Israeli TV and calls himself a 'White Zionist' the connection is still not apparent.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    Curious isn't it?

    Even when Richard Spencer appears on Israeli TV and calls himself a 'White Zionist' the connection is still not apparent.
    Well, part of the reason is that Spencer talks about "races", which is much more loaded with connotations, whereas Zionists tend to talk about "peoples" or "nations", which are much more anodyne and moderate-sounding, though they mean largely the same thing.

    But yeah, it's also down to a reluctance to see Zionism through the same lens of being an ethno-nationalist movement. The contrast isn't just with white supremacists and neo-Nazis like Spencer. Look at the reaction to the ethno-nationalist movements following the break-ups Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Karadžić's manifesto for a Serb ethno-state was brought up in ICTY trials as proof of his genocidal intent, for heaven's sake!
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Well, part of the reason is that Spencer talks about "races", which is much more loaded with connotations, whereas Zionists tend to talk about "peoples" or "nations", which are much more anodyne and moderate-sounding, though they mean largely the same thing.

    But yeah, it's also down to a reluctance to see Zionism through the same lens of being an ethno-nationalist movement. The contrast isn't just with white supremacists and neo-Nazis like Spencer. Look at the reaction to the ethno-nationalist movements following the break-ups Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Karadžić's manifesto for a Serb ethno-state was brought up in ICTY trials as proof of his genocidal intent, for heaven's sake!
    Antisemitism!!!!!!!!!!

    Spoiler:
    Show


    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Antisemitism!!!!!!!!!!

    Spoiler:
    Show






    Appreciate the joke, though have to say I'm becoming increasingly bored by this whole thing now. It's not even political opportunism any more, it's just that people have dug themselves into this ethnic essentialist hole and can't get out of it. For example, see Howard Jacobson's NYT article last week in which he rants about Labour, and then once again tries to argue that Zionism is an essential and integral part of Jewishness.*

    *A tangent about this latter point. Obviously I disagree about the mere truth value of this claim (and indeed, the judge in the 2013 UCU trial already found against it), but more importantly, I think it's dangerous. Keeping religious faith and ethnic identity (protected categories) separate from assumed political opinions (not a protected category) at an official-legal level is a much bigger cornerstone of liberal democracy than people give it credit for.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Well heres my view for what it's worth. I'm not aiming this response at anti-Zionists, because I think they are often beyond rational discussion.

    1) The only independent sovereign nations to ever exist in the Land of Israel were the two ancient Jewish commonwealths, the second of which was destroyed in 70 of the common era.

    2) For 3,000 years, Jews have expressed the desire to return to their ancestral homeland: at the Passover Seder, the Yom Kippur service, in daily prayer, in the blessing after meals, under the wedding canopy, on the yearly day of national mourning Tisha B'Av, and by placing Israeli soil in the coffin of their deceased.

    3) Even after exile, Jews managed to keep a continual presence of Jewish communities in such cities as Jerusalem, Tzfat, Tiberias, Shechem, and Hebron.

    4) Centuries before the inception of Islam, Jews were yearning to return to Israel, and the Koran itself records this in many suras (chapters), such as 17:7, 17:104, and 5:21 that tells the Jews to "enter into the Holy Land which Allah has assigned to you."

    5) Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have consciously chosen to isolate refugees as political pawns,rather than integrate them into a normalized life. As opposed to refugees in Arab countries, Israel integrated Arabs within its borders as citizens, and 1.2 million Israeli Arabs now enjoy citizenship, benefits, and governmental representation in Israel.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I should note before starting here that only the last of these is actually anything to do with the modern situation. The rest is nationalist mythohistory.

    (Original post by Flx1)
    1) The only independent sovereign nations to ever exist in the Land of Israel were the two ancient Jewish commonwealths, the second of which was destroyed in 70 of the common era.
    A few things here:
    - The large United Kingdom of Israel of David and Solomon described in the Bible most likely never existed, and is likely a later tradition.
    - The Northern/Israel/Samaria and Southern/Judah Kingdoms did exist, but likely were typical Canaanite pagans. It's not until King Josiah of Judah in the late 7th Century BCE that we start to get monolatrist religion, and probably not until the Babylonian exile that something recognisably monotheist developed. Also, it should be noted here that the term "Jewish" referred initially to Judah.
    - A short-lived independent Jewish state, the Hasmonean Kingdom, lost its independence in 63 BCE to Pompey's conquests. The Romans initially left local leaders in place, but gradually reduced their role over time, until the outbreak of the revolt in 66 CE. Independence was long gone before Titus captured Jerusalem in 70 CE.
    - Pretty sure the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem was an independent state in the same area.

    2) For 3,000 years, Jews have expressed the desire to return to their ancestral homeland: at the Passover Seder, the Yom Kippur service
    - Well, obviously not 3,000 years - obviously Jews weren't expressing the desire to return before they'd been exiled.
    - "Next Year in Jerusalem" is actually a much newer tradition than people tend to assume. It doesn't start appearing in the Passover Seder until about 1400, for instance. The phrase itself goes back a few more centuries, but we're still looking at the late Dark Ages at the earliest.

    3) Even after exile, Jews managed to keep a continual presence of Jewish communities in such cities as Jerusalem, Tzfat, Tiberias, Shechem, and Hebron.
    - Which is really evidence that the Roman exile is less of the event it's been traditionally thought of. Yes, in the aftermath of the revolts there was a large Jewish forced exodus from the region, both in terms of Jews taken as slaves by the Romans, and refugees fleeing from the warzone. But this was what the Romans did everywhere they fought. With the exception of Jerusalem itself, there wasn't a specific policy requiring Jews to leave.
    - Shechem was destroyed in 67 CE. There hasn't been a community of anyone there since. Nablus is not the same city with a different name - it is a different city, founded years after the destruction of Shechem, in a different though nearby location. Referring to Nablus as "Shechem" is a bit like referring to Baghdad as "Ctesiphon" or Tunis as "Carthage".

    4) Centuries before the inception of Islam, Jews were yearning to return to Israel, and the Koran itself records this in many suras (chapters), such as 17:7, 17:104, and 5:21 that tells the Jews to "enter into the Holy Land which Allah has assigned to you."
    - Not really seeing how "O my people, enter the Holy Land which Allah has prescribed for you and do not turn back in your traces" necessarily implies the people being addressed are Jews, though perhaps I'm missing context from previous verses?
    - This risks projecting our modern notions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam as fully formed and completely separate religions back into historical periods where that was much less the case. At the time of the authorship of the Koran, "Islam", in any sense we would understand the term, almost certainly did not exist. We're talking about an Abrahamic sect among Arab tribes that was still very much in its early defining phases.
    - Most importantly, so what? Why should what the Koran says matter to international politics today.

    5) Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have consciously chosen to isolate refugees as political pawns,rather than integrate them into a normalized life. As opposed to refugees in Arab countries, Israel integrated Arabs within its borders as citizens, and 1.2 million Israeli Arabs now enjoy citizenship, benefits, and governmental representation in Israel.
    Finally, something actually related to the modern situation.....

    - This isn't really a like for like comparison - you're comparing the actions of a home country towards its own population to that of an asylum country towards refugees within its borders. The Palestinian Arabs who were still in Israel after the 1948 War weren't refugees from somewhere else. A state granting its population citizenship rights isn't some great generosity, it's a basic state obligation in the modern era. Those who ended up in Syria/Lebanon/etc as refugees were in a rather different situation. Those states had (and still have) no obligations to them other than asylum. The refugees' homes were the territory that was now Israel.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I have lots more facts that can be used in reference to the modern situation, however people are so caught up on "the Jewish theft of Palestine". History actually has a lot to do with all of this, as people are asking what the Jewish claim is to Israel, so of course we need to look back in history and not at modern situations? Regardless of your opinions you cannot change facts, and the facts are that Jews existed there before any take overs by the muslim faith, with recent archaeological finds to support it.

    If anyones interested (either for or against) theres been a very interesting programme regarding the history of Jerusalem on BB2, really informative. Think the first episode goes off tomorrow though

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod...uggid=b01852x1
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarahsez)
    But Jews wanting they own country- there's nothing wrong with that, and that's what Zionism is. Just like Christians or Muslims would want they own country.

    I do not agree with their occupation of Palestine, but it seems people are against Jews having their own land. Look how beautiful, successful, progressive and advanced Israel has become. Most Palestinians and Arabs would prefer to live in Israel. They would rather be citizens of Israel.77% of Arab citizens would rather live in Israel. They do not wish to live in a palestinian state.

    What does that tell you?
    Uncle Sam
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flx1)
    I have lots more facts that can be used in reference to the modern situation, however people are so caught up on "the Jewish theft of Palestine". History actually has a lot to do with all of this, as people are asking what the Jewish claim is to Israel, so of course we need to look back in history and not at modern situations?
    Actually I think the question of nationalist claims of "rightful ownership" of land (in virtually all contexts, not just here) are silly and futile. It isn't going to change that everyone in the area needs political rights within a state, which is the much more useful way of framing the question.

    That said, the further you go back in making historical claims, the less relevant they are. For a whole host of reasons. International law gets less codified. The question of what is and what isn't an independent state (as well as where that state's jurisdiction ends) becomes vaguer. The historical record gets sparser. And of course

    Regardless of your opinions you cannot change facts, and the facts are that Jews existed there before any take overs by the muslim faith, with recent archaeological finds to support it.
    In other words, Judaism is an older religion that Islam, something we already knew - what is this meant to prove exactly?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarahsez)
    Don't most religions want they own country or state ?

    Wasn't Pakistan split from India because Muslims wanted they own country and weren't being treated equally ?

    Jews have suffered somuch throughout history, more than any other religion, so what if they want they own country where they can finally feel safe?

    I'm not saying I agree with they occupation of Palestine, but there's nothing wrong with nationalism particularly considering how much they have suffered in the past.

    Muslims and Christians against Zionism are nothing but hypocrites!
    You alluded to the problem in your post above.

    Pakistan was founded due to reasons of division. To cut a long story short, the population of a nation became displaced so as to concentrate into two general groups within this same land that they had.

    The problem with the case that has been mentioned (of Zion/Israel) is as follows.
    Around the time of the world wars, Jews were transported to Palestine as agreed in the Balfour declaration. Jews were seen as being a population that had always been under oppression and this exaggerated (not completely false) notion was used as an irrational justification to forcibly occupy Palestine. Now, had they just lived among the Palestinians, there most likely wouldn't have been any conflict - historically, Jews often lived alongside Muslims because they were saved from Christian oppression. However, they assumed the land to be theirs - the land which had long belonged to the Palestinians was all of a sudden claimed not to be theirs on the authority of our (British) power. As a result, Palestine dwindled more and more throughout the years until Israel illegally consumed all but the two bits of land we see today. There was no war, no organised transfer of authority. The country, people's homes, were just taken and assumed to no longer be theirs. Anyone that disagrees with this or speaks out of line because of it faces government men with firearms.

    The Jews were allowed to live in Jerusalem, not by the Christians, but by the Muslims after a 6 century exile. Yet the audacity of the Israelis is such that they even dishonour the agreement of the Masjid al-Aqsa at whim and prevent Muslims from praying there. This isn't just the case with the recent issue a few months ago - my friend visited Masjid al-Aqsa 2 years ago and describes how, for no reason but a display of force and oppression, Muslims were prevented from entering and so prayed to God outside on the streets.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarahsez)
    But Jews wanting they own country- there's nothing wrong with that, and that's what Zionism is. Just like Christians or Muslims would want they own country.

    I do not agree with their occupation of Palestine, but it seems people are against Jews having their own land. Look how beautiful, successful, progressive and advanced Israel has become. Most Palestinians and Arabs would prefer to live in Israel. They would rather be citizens of Israel.77% of Arab citizens would rather live in Israel. They do not wish to live in a palestinian state.

    What does that tell you?
    It tells me that Israel has deprived Palestine to the extent that it has taken most of the resources and inhibited the latter's progression.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OliviaRose98!)
    Don't you see it's wrong to take someone else's country and then claim it's yours and that the inhabitants (the Palestinians) never existed? Zionism is used to destroy the identity of Palestinians. That is what's wrong with it.
    this
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.