The Paradox of Israel: Regional Super Power and the Largest Jewish Ghetto Ever Created

[cali]

By Ira Chernus, AlterNet. Posted January 2, 2009.



Israelis keep saying they only want security, while they go on electing leaders whose policies make them less secure.
Trying to understand the psychology of a people at war is a lot like trying to find the bodies buried under a bombed out building.

For more than forty years I’ve been watching my own Jewish people in wartime, repeating the same self-defeating pattern over and over. Most Jews say that they want Israel to be more secure, and they really mean it. Yet they support and vote for leaders who perpetuate the conflicts that make Israel less secure.

I’ve been digging for decades through the endless pieces of that paradox, trying to get to the bottom of it. Here’s what I see now as the bottom layer (though there may be layers further down that I haven’t reached yet).

The root of the problem lies in the Jews’ relationship to the non-Jewish world and, even more, in the way Jews understand that relationship.

<snip>

This is a long and very interesting piece.

http://www.alternet.org/audits/116723/the_paradox_of_is...

[bemildred]

1. Excellent. nt

[LeftishBrit]

2. A most interesting article

I agree that the 'great disconnect' causes Israel to adopt very self-defeating policies. I also think it causes the Palestinians to do so. And that it applies to many across the world.

Of course, Israelis and Palestinians have really been subjected to 'disconnections' - a long history of antisemitism in the one case; and a long recent history of living as refugees and everyone's enemy or pawn in the other -, which reinforce these attitudes and policies.

[shira]

3. yes, interesting article

but once again, it's subtle racism.

Only the "Jews" hold the key and are able to solve the problem, being more "responsible" for their actions than the "other" who is far less capable, responsible, knowledgable, or take your pick. The Jews are the "adults", the "others" are the children who cannot be expected to be as accountable as "Israel". Whether now or 60 years ago back in 1948, this subtle racism has existed. The Arabs are the retarded children, the Jews being the responsible adult.

If only Israel ends the occupation (as in Gaza, Sinai, S.Lebanon) or ends settlements (as in Sinai, Gaza), etc... there will be peace. So long as it's Israel (the Jew among the nations) making the tough choices, then things will fall into place. But it hasn't happened this way. Israel has made tough concessions, the "other side" has not".

The problem with all this is that it takes two to tango. While Israel is for a positive sum outcome where both sides "win", the other side is for the zero-sum outcome, with one side "winning" and the other "losing", or in other words, what's good for "them" cannot be good for "us". The author of this article fails to take this into account, and therefore fails to understand why Israel has not yet attained peace. Anti-semitism plays a major role too - it's not as if it disappeared after 1945.

[cali]

4. There isn't a smidgeon of racism in this article

These facts remain true:

Israel is occupying territory that is not its. Israel has placed/allowed hundreds of thousands of settlers in this territory.

Israel holds most of the power in the I/P relationship.

And I'm sorry but your sick little narrative of Israel/Jews the eternal victim/good guy is no better than the opposite equation. Both are equally and vilely sick as shit.

[shira]

8. so then

you are supremely confident that if Israel (the Jew) in that region, makes all the tough and risky choices and concessions, then of course peace will result? That seems to be the theme of the article.

?

[cali]

10. Did I say that? No. There are no guarantees

And I've always said that both sides must make tough and risky decisions. The Palestinians should give up the right of return, for example.

I'm saying that it's bullshit to paint one side as good and the other as evil.

[shira]

12. what "side" do you believe I think is evil?

Palestinians in general, or the Arab leadership of that region? There is a difference, you know.

And note that the article in the OP is talking about Jews in general, not just the leadership in Israel. I'm not making the comparison of Jews to Arabs in general. You are.

If there is no guarantee of peace given that Israel makes all the right, tough choices, then you're siding with me over the author of the OP. I believe it's arrogant to assume that if Israel makes and acts upon all the tough choices, then Israel is no longer in the "ghetto", as the author puts it.

Do you at least agree that in the past 60 years, one side has clearly undertaken tough and risky decisions while the other has made practically none? This is a question based on FACT, not on wishful thinking.

[cali]

15. I don't think either side has made enough tough decisions

and I think you are blindly pro-Israel.

[bemildred]

5. He says nothing of the sort.

And you just confirmed one of his major points.

[shira]

9. what was confirmed?

[bemildred]

13. The article is not mysterious, it's there if you want to read it.

I have no intention of arguing it out with someone who does not want to hear. If you show some shred of evidence of having read it and understood the authors intent, I'll consider going further with a discussion.

[shira]

14. I asked a simple question

and I read the article already. If you're interested in discussing, lemme know.

[bemildred]

17. And I told you how to answer if for yourself.

And I already told you I am not interested in discussing, as things stand.
Have a nice day.

[PATRICK]

6. The two "thems"

There is only one troublesome element. Those people who thrive on violence and power who foster and fester in situations that insanely divide ordinary people against their own common and individual interests. Olhmert is not reading or agonizing or reflecting on Martin Buber, anymore than Bush laments his shredding of the Constitution he has never in all likelihood ever read even in parts. The wisdom of the awakened sucker has not taken hold enough yet to rightly focus the universal or particular blame for the counter intuitive death and destruction people are engaged in while the actual earth is literally changing beneath their boots.

The bigots and most especially the clique that profited mightily from human weakness created the us vs. them tradition that has led to the Israeli hawks(probably dourly grimacing at the Gotterdammerung Biblical interpretations of the ultimate result of this useless slaughter) to "pragmatically" yet with complete scenario of final doom, imitate their persecutors, notably Adolph Hitler concerning strength and will and ruthless application of a type of righteousness and national salvation.

That a democracy of sorts has been suckered once more into this "trap" seems familiar to us here in the world's greatest democracy, the "Greatest Show On Earth".

[cali]

7. what nonsense.

or to put it more accurately: word salad.

[PATRICK]

11. I dislike

vinegar on my salad, but it likely needed it. Somewhere in that nonsense I merely regretted that rightly that entire populations can be to blame but the manipulators of disaster are few. In the even larger picture all people are too passively divided and that does not offer much hope to a small nation that knows itself isolated and at war.

[chimpymustgo]

16. The article is interesting, but I think ultimately disengenuous. Israel has stolen land,

massacred Palestinians, and continue to humiliate and deny them basic human necessities. That cannot be justified by contending the Jewish people refuse to "relate" to their neighbors. It is FAR more pernicious than that.

[cali]

18. there is nothing disengenuous about the article.

I could tell you that Palestinians have massacred Israelis and Jews. That would also be true. Do I really need to remind people of the massacre of the Israeli athletes, of pizzaria, hotel and bus bombings that did nothing but murder civilians?

And yes, the settlements are an abomination, but not quite so simple as you'd like it to be.

You are nothing but the mirror image of the haters on the other side.

[chimpymustgo]

19. And you are a simplistic fool.

-snip-

But another piece of the puzzle is that though American Jewish liberals tend to take a lot of comfort in the idea of Israel’s good intentions and good faith throughout this whole process, there’s a reason approximately no Arabs anywhere in the world see it that way. All throughout the “peace process” years — through the good ones and through the bad ones — Israel continued expanding both the geographical footprint of its settlements and the population living upon them. For most of this time, Israel has often appeared unwilling to enforce domestic Israeli law on the settler population, to say nothing of abiding by international law or agreements made. And while Israel has stated a desire to leave the Gaza Palestinians alone in their tiny, overcrowded, economically unviable enclave, the “disengagement” from Gaza has never entailed letting Palestinians control their borders or exercise meaningful sovereignty over the area. The proposal has basically been that if Palestinians cease violence against Israel, then the Gaza Strip will be treated like an Indian reservation. Israel’s policy objectives in the West Bank appear to be first seizing the choice bits of it, and then withdrawing behind a wall with the residual West Bank treating like post-”disengagement” Gaza.

more...
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/01/why_ ...

edited to add copy and link

[cali]

20. lol. I'm hardly the one exressing ignorant and simplistic views

on the issue of I/P. Not in this thread or any other. People who paint one side or the other in crude and simplistic terms of all good/all evil, are the fools. And woefully ignorant.

[chimpymustgo]

21. And that is EXACTLY what your silly OP is: a "simplistic" "explanation" of why Israeli's

allow the massacres and land theft. Pull-eeze. "They don't relate to their neighbors." That would be laughable, were it not so disgustingly simplistic and apologetic.

[cali]

23. actually, it's a rather sophisticated and thoughtful

analysis of part of the problem. I expected whining from the mindless partisans on both sides. I wasn't disappointed. You guys are really all alike.

[chimpymustgo]

25. It's thoughtful, but ultimately misses the mark, with its gentle psychobabble to explain vicious -

and continual - actions.

And Cali, you never disappoint either: always hysterically judgemental and dismissive of opinions that vary from your own.

[cali]

26. actually,

you're the judgmental one- as you prove over and over and over again. Endless, really. I actually pay attention to more than one side. Try it sometime.

[PufPuf23]

27. There is nothing simple about the P-I problem

If I had my druthers, the region would go back to the original UN boundaries with Jerusalem an international city.

Here is an interesting analysis about the settlements and wall building from the WaPo.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/20...

[chimpymustgo]

31. Corrected link to thinkprogress.org.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/01/why_...

-snip-

But another piece of the puzzle is that though American Jewish liberals tend to take a lot of comfort in the idea of Israel’s good intentions and good faith throughout this whole process, there’s a reason approximately no Arabs anywhere in the world see it that way. All throughout the “peace process” years — through the good ones and through the bad ones — Israel continued expanding both the geographical footprint of its settlements and the population living upon them. For most of this time, Israel has often appeared unwilling to enforce domestic Israeli law on the settler population, to say nothing of abiding by international law or agreements made. And while Israel has stated a desire to leave the Gaza Palestinians alone in their tiny, overcrowded, economically unviable enclave, the “disengagement” from Gaza has never entailed letting Palestinians control their borders or exercise meaningful sovereignty over the area. The proposal has basically been that if Palestinians cease violence against Israel, then the Gaza Strip will be treated like an Indian reservation. Israel’s policy objectives in the West Bank appear to be first seizing the choice bits of it, and then withdrawing behind a wall with the residual West Bank treating like post-”disengagement” Gaza.

more...

[Duckhunter935]

22. Another simple question?

Why does not Egypt allow food and supplies across the border they have with Gaza. They are fellow Arabs

[cali]

24. A simple question with a complicated answer.

For one thing the Mubarek regime is afraid of unrest in Egypt from such sources as the Muslim Brotherhood. Also, Egypt is highly reliant on U.S. aid.

[Boojatta]

29. "Also, Egypt is highly reliant on U.S. aid."

That reminds me of this section of text from this thread:

And while Israel has stated a desire to leave the Gaza Palestinians alone in their tiny, overcrowded, economically unviable enclave, the “disengagement” from Gaza has never entailed letting Palestinians control their borders or exercise meaningful sovereignty over the area. The proposal has basically been that if Palestinians cease violence against Israel, then the Gaza Strip will be treated like an Indian reservation.

Just replace "Gaza Palestinians" with "Egyptians" and make a few other modifications. For example, delete the word "tiny."

[Sultana]

37. Sadly, Arabs don't give a shit about the Palestinians

[Meshuga]

28. I agree and disagree with the author

While I think we need to change the approach (which is something easier said then done) the author spoils his article with generalizations and with his own prejudice. Attributing "ghetto thinking" to the Jewish community in general is offensive and ignorant. While there are those with this frame of mind in play and they have more voice and clout than they should have, it is bullshit to use it to explain the Jewish community as a whole.

He is saying that Jews, with their so called ghetto frame of mind, cannot help it but to stay inside those walls so that must explain the Jewish blind advocacy for Israel. And if Jews complain about the faults on the other side then they must be these overly sensitive people who see the rest of the world as mean haters of Jews.

America is the perfect example of how Jews embrace relationship with the outside world and, in addition, celebrate the influences from outside groups. Secular Judaism, the non-orthodox movements, and even the modern orthodox are all about the rejection of this ghetto idea.

I think the disconnect the author describes lives inside of his own prejudice and assumptions on how Jews in general think. It is not hard to understand that Jews will obviously side with the security of the Jewish state and advocate for their own side. But it doesn't mean they don't realize Israel's own fault and the ugliness of it all.

Just because Jews think that a nation has the right and obligation to respond militarily to those who send rockets on its people it doesn't mean they don't see the situation on the other side as unfortunate.

Israeli's in general want to live in peace with its neighbors but they are being sold by their leaders the idea that if, for example, this attack on Hammas will succeed then it would be easier to negotiate peace with moderates. But to say that Israelis and Jews in general envision an ideal country with walls separating Jews from its neighbors is not only unfair but ignorant.

[Boojatta]

30. "Attributing 'ghetto thinking' to the Jewish community in general..."

How would you feel if the phrase were revised and expanded as follows?

The thinking ...

1. is excessively cosmopolitan and globalization-oriented in some (unspecified) respects; and

2. is ghetto thinking in all respects other than the unspecified respects mentioned above.

This way, no matter what aspect of thought is being considered, there would always be room for improvement.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Shaktimaan]

33. Why are the two at odds?

First of all, Judaism is not a race. Just because the Nazis saw Jews in racial terms does not mean that it is accurate, (Jewish people would be best understood as a nationality, in the sense of a nation of people, not in the modern nation-state sense of the word.) But in truth it does not fit neatly into any single category. It is not merely a religion, nor an ethnicity, nor a culture, nor a nation. One thing it is not at all though is a "race." Consider the Arabs. Do the Arab people constitute a race? Or the Latino people? No. Neither do the Jews. I am baffled as to why you would look to the Nazis as an authority on Judaism in the first place.

Most states recognize a special relationship with a single ethnicity. Greece, Germany, Finland, Japan... they all offer special terms for immigration for those of the ethnicity that their state represents. International law and the world community at large has upheld this concept as acceptable time and time again.

Having a homeland for a specific nationality of people is nothing special, most nation-states are based on this concept. It only becomes problematic if the citizens of any nation are discriminated against or oppressed. Israel may be the homeland of the Jews but it does not discriminate against its Arab, Druze, Cristian, Muslim or Bedouin populations because of that.

Self-determination has never been held as an impediment to democracy. If that were the case then almost every country in the world that proudly calls themselves democratic would be equally suspect.

[Violet_Crumble]

34. That's a really interesting article. Thanks for posting it...

It was a long read, but very well worth the time....

[StudsT]

35. not to mention the largest palestinian ghetto ever created

end the occupation.

StudsT

[cayuga]

36. "In other words: Nobody likes us, and we can't understand why."

Damn...I didn't realize Cheny was Jewish!

Maybe when the Israelis buy a vowel and figure out why nobody likes them..we might get somewhere.