Goal Of Zionism

[Israelite9191]

I know that I am posting almost a year after the last post, but I must point out that Zionism is in no way equateable to Evangelical Christianity and other "militant" sects. Zionism does not actively missionize people, or conduct wars of aggresion against other religions, or attempt to "cleanse" religion at home. Zionism is just a movement within Judaism with the goal of establishing and mantaning a viable state in the Jewish homeland of Israel. Many non-Jews assume that Zionism is a sect of right-wing Judaism, when it is actually the kind of movement that I mentioned above. Also, many non-Jews don't realize that, by definition, practically every Jew wether they be Reform, Reconstructionist, Orthodox, or even Hassidic is a Zionist. I will almost certainly not be looking at this page again so please do not post dissagreements with me. I just thought I might mention that I am a Reform (left-wing/liberal) Jew and my information comes from sources ranging from extremely religious Orthodox Jews to almost Secular Reform and Reconstructionist Jews who would all agree, undoubtably, with the above statement.

[rhialto]

Originally Posted by Israelite9191

I know that I am posting almost a year after the last post, but I must point out that Zionism is in no way equateable to Evangelical Christianity and other "militant" sects. Zionism does not actively missionize people, or conduct wars of aggresion against other religions, or attempt to "cleanse" religion at home. Zionism is just a movement within Judaism with the goal of establishing and mantaning a viable state in the Jewish homeland of Israel. Many non-Jews assume that Zionism is a sect of right-wing Judaism, when it is actually the kind of movement that I mentioned above. Also, many non-Jews don't realize that, by definition, practically every Jew wether they be Reform, Reconstructionist, Orthodox, or even Hassidic is a Zionist. I will almost certainly not be looking at this page again so please do not post dissagreements with me. I just thought I might mention that I am a Reform (left-wing/liberal) Jew and my information comes from sources ranging from extremely religious Orthodox Jews to almost Secular Reform and Reconstructionist Jews who would all agree, undoubtably, with the above statement.

This reads a lot like flamebait to me, especially as you have declared an intention not to read any responses, all the more so for practicing necromancy on a dead thread.

The line about a Jewish homeland implies a right to take that land from the people who happen to be already living there, and I don't think many Zionists (not the ones who make the real decisions anyway) have seriously suggested buying the land at its fair market value.

[Israelite9191]

The reason I said I would not be returning was I didn't remember how to get here, but I found it, so here I am. Secondly, Israel, when the Zionists came, was pretty musch nothing more than a big swamp and a big dessert. The Zionists made Israel into the productive country that it is today. Practically no one lived on the land when the Zionists came and all they did was settle land that was not being used. Most Zionists have never denied the right for a Palestine to exist, in fact, the Zionist were the driving force that created the state of Jordan (orriginally Trans-Jordan) for the Palestinians out of British land. By the use of the word "homeland" I mean that Israel is the homeland of the Jews just as much as Ireland is for the Irish, Japan for the Japanese, and Egypt for the Egyptians. And besides this, any Palestinian living in Israel can apply for Israeli citizenship if born outside of Israel or before Israel's founding, already have citizenship if born inside of Israel, and have much more prosperous lives than before Israel's founding. Now, don't take me wrong, I'm not one of these fanatics who believe that the West Bank and Gaza Strip (the Gaza Strip, by the way, never belonged to Israel and was the land that the Philistines, ancestors of modern Palestinians in combination with Arabs, inhabited) should be kept without a square inch given to the Palestinians. What I am saying is that by definition Zionists are not militant (although there is a small minority that is) and do not actively seek out people to convert. And as such, doesnot belong in a list consisting of Evangilical Christians and Fundementalist Muslims.

[mitsho]

Originally Posted by Israelite9191

By the use of the word "homeland" I mean that Israel is the homeland of the Jews just as much as Ireland is for the Irish, Japan for the Japanese, and Egypt for the Egyptians.

and as Hungary is for the Hungarians? Bulgaria for the Bulgarians? America for the Americans?
My Dear, Migration has been such a vital part of history, that it is just not correct to assume that a land you left nearly 2000 years ago, can still be claimed for you. The Jews needed some place, but there was no reason why the modern Israel would be the place for such a state. In fact, on the first zionistic congress (here in Basel btw.), the Zionists talked that their Jewish state could be in Uganda!

It seems to me that you are looking on these things from a little to Jewish point of view! You need to widen your look and see that the truth is combined out of several point of views, not solemny the Jewish one.

mfG mitsho

PS: I want to reinforce my statement that I have nothing against Jews, nor do I say their state in Israel shouldn't belong to them, just in case you read my post not good enough.

EDIT: Btw. I just remarked that this discussion is totally off-topic, so I say, we let this thread rest in peace?

[ainwood]

Originally Posted by rhialto

This reads a lot like flamebait to me, especially as you have declared an intention not to read any responses, all the more so for practicing necromancy on a dead thread.

He is simply posting an opinion - and you are welcome to debate his points. This was not a useless bump - he responded with decent points (albeit ones that are more suited to Off-Topic or even World History).

The line about a Jewish homeland implies a right to take that land from the people who happen to be already living there, and I don't think many Zionists (not the ones who make the real decisions anyway) have seriously suggested buying the land at its fair market value.

And you are free to respond to his points as well.

[ainwood]

Originally Posted by mitsho

EDIT: Btw. I just remarked that this discussion is totally off-topic, so I say, we let this thread rest in peace?

Moderator Action: SPlit to debate in World History instead.

[YNCS]

Here is the text of one of the most important props of Zionism, the Balfour Declaration. Note: Arthur Balfour was British Foreign Secretary when this letter was written, Baron Rothschild was a leading British Zionist.

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,

Arthur James Balfour

[Rambuchan]

Worth mentioning that the Rothschilds have been the banking / finance behind much of Britain's imperial efforts. They financed the exploration and explansion in Zimbabwe, the arms and allies involved in the Suez affair, and many other instances. Interesting to see the letter you have posted in this light. This family have been the sounding board and the voice whispering in the ear of many British Foreign Ministers. And here they are again . If the Maxim Gun symbolised British Military conduct, then the Rothschilds were the bank / family funding it all.

[Aussie_Lurker]

What I most deeply object to is Israelite's attempt to promulgate the long disproven myth that Palestine was nothing but 'Swamp and Desert' before the Jews returned in 1946-48. This myth must sit alongside 'Manifest Destiny' in the US, and 'Terra Nullius' in Australia, as being the biggest load of B/S in human history. Just like the previous two examples, the myth of the 'Palestinian Wasteland' and the idea of Palestinians being nothing but 'rootless nomads' was just a bunch of tripe-invented by the Zionist founding fathers-to justify the mass disenfranchisment of the Palestinian people (a disenfranchisment which is at the heart of the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict). Modern historical analysis-much of it done by Israeli Historians has shown that, aside from a small proportion of Southern Beduoin tribes, the bulk of the Palestinian people were settled in prosperous cities and towns-filled with farmers, artisans, merchants and businessmen. In the 100 years prior to the formation of Israel, these Palestinians welcomed members of the Jewish diaspora as long-lost brothers, and the town leaders would often gift them with parcels of good farmland for them to work-alongside Palestinian farms. Their reward for this kindness? To be abused and persecuted and even murdered by Right-Wing Zionist militia-such as the dreaded Irgun. In total, around 7000 Palestinians (men, women and children) were killed in the year leading up to the declaration of Israel as an Independant Jewish state in 1948-with most of those deaths being caused by a variety of Right-Wing paramilitary groups. It is this fact which puts paid to the other Great Myth used to justify the disposession of the Palestinian people-and that is that the Palestinians voluntarily left the country-in preparation for an Arab invasion. Again historians have shown, categorically, that the Palestinians were driven from the country-in terror-by the Zionist militias, and that whole towns and villages were wiped out to the last man, woman and child.
So please, Israelite, don't give me your racist, pseudo-historical B/S. Check the facts properly before you post again, and you will probably learn that your precious Zionists have behaved no better-and probably much worse-than the average Islamic terrorist.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[frekk]

Zionism is not a religious movement. It is a secular, ethnic nationalist movement not unlike the others which arose alongside it in Europe during the late 19th and early 20th century.

[Israelite9191]

Aussie Lurker- I am extremely offended that you would call me a racist, especially considering that I have stood up for the rights of Palestinians in debate even with my own mother and grandmother! Palestinians have every right to a homeland in the Gaza Strip and at least the northern part of the West Bank. I also admit that I was overzealous in my comment on one big desert and one big jungle, I mean, if most Palestinians had been nomads then Jerusalem wouldn't even exist! As for why Israel has to be in Israel and not, say, Uganda, is that a "homeland" for Jews in a place Jews never lived would mean that Jews would not care as much about it and it would almost not worth it. Also, if Israel had been fouded in Uganda, we would be having the same discussion except taking out Palestinians for Ugandans and my counterparts using the argument that Isarel should have been put in Palestine as that is where ancient Israel was. As you can see the same problems would arise except that Jews still wouldn't be in their original homeland. I believe that the only solution to the problem is give Israel most of the land that ancient Israel encompased and to give the Palestinians the land that ancient Philistia (the precursor ot Palestine) encompased as well as some, if not all, land in the West Bank.

[Israelite9191]

I know I am double posting, but I felt that this needed to be stated seperately. I just wanted to say that my original point in posting was to disinguish between Evangelism and Zionism. Evangelism actively seeks out and converts people. Zionism does not actively seek out and convert people. That's the big difference, right there, plain and simple.

[Louis XXIV]

Originally Posted by frekk

Zionism is not a religious movement. It is a secular, ethnic nationalist movement not unlike the others which arose alongside it in Europe during the late 19th and early 20th century.

Exactly right. Its a nationalist movement, just like any other. AFAIK, Judaism doesn't really convert anyone anyway, so, of course, it wouldn't be for the purpose of conversion.

[Aussie_Lurker]

@Israelite. On this last point I do agree with you-Zionism and Evanglism are nothing alike, beyond their belief in the absolute correctness of their beliefs. As Frekk pointed out, Zionism is a primarily nationalist movement, but with a deep grounding in relgious fundamentalist, particularly revolving around the belief in 'The Promised Land'. Also, I am sorry about calling you racist, but your whole 'Desert & Swamp' claim is identical to that put across by Right-Wing Jewish extremists, most often to justify the theft of Palestinian land. If you didn't want me to lump you in with them, you should really have stated your position a bit better from the get go.
As for how much land is fair, well true justice would suggest the original 48% of Palestine promised under the UN's Partition resolution of 1948. As we do not live in a perfect world, however, then they really deserve ALL of the West Bank and Gaza-given that those territories are being held, and occupied, illegally by the Israeli's (a fact which, had they been almost any other nation, would have earned them a US-backed invasion but which, because of the powerful Israeli lobby, actually earns them every more money from the US tax-payer ).

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[frekk]

Originally Posted by Israelite9191

Evangelism actively seeks out and converts people. Zionism does not actively seek out and convert people. That's the big difference, right there, plain and simple.

I'd have to say there's an element of truth in comparing evangelicalism with Zionism even if it's not technically correct ... much as one might compare Stalinism to a form of religion. Zionism certainly does seek to spread its basic beliefs quite a bit beyond the actual Jewish community. Hasbara is more or less an evangelical activity, though in a political rather than theological sense.

[Headline]

The best way to solve the problem is to discard any national religion there is. A state like Israel does not separate "synagog" and state, and that is where the problem is all along. Zionism is never a secular movement. With name like "Israel", how can the state be religiously not biased? I doubt any Palestinian would accept such a state with open mindness.

[Israelite9191]

Aussie Lurker- Thank for retracting your statement about me being a racist. And yes, I should have stated my position more clearly, I often find that I am just a little to eager when it comes ot Israel. As for whether or not Israel can be classed with Evangelism, it can not. Evangelism teaches that the only way to heaven is through Jesus, that misionizing is of the upmost importance, and that "we are right, you are wrong." Zionism teaches that Israel needs to exist and that the are of historical Israel is the only legitimate place for Israel. Zionism does try to convince people of this, but that is not a religious statement. Jews, Zionists included, believe that the Torah and its lawas are reserved for the Children of Israel, a.k.a. Jews, and that what others believe is their own decision. (in fact, the only religious belief that Judaism forces on Jews is that there is only one god and that the Torah is the word of G-d, but that interpretation is needed or else we cant understand the teachings of the Torah because they are not literal). As for seperating synagougue form state in Israel, this can not be done. The reason is that Judaism the religion and Judaism the people have been tied together for so long that it is impossible to seperate the two. Also, in the Israeli court and legislative sytems, all laws and regulations are secular and are not guided by the Torah, the rest of the Old Testament, or rabinical teaching. It is true that many politicians find themselves drawing their opinions from religion and that religion plays a major role in elections and the political system.

P.S.- Aussie Lurker- I retracted my statement about swamp and desert. While it is ture that there was one swamp that the Zionists eliminated, it did not encompas nearly enough land for it to have ment any thing to anyone except for the early Zionists who were trying to found setlements were there was no land for settlements, and the Negev desert is the only desert in the world that is now shrinking, but that is just because Zionist were so desperate to find new land for all of the incoming Jewish immigrants that they began terraforming the desert into hospitable land.

[frekk]

Originally Posted by Headline

Zionism is never a secular movement. With name like "Israel", how can the state be religiously not biased? I doubt any Palestinian would accept such a state with open mindness.

The state is ethnically biased ... its only incidental that it happens to be religiously biased (due to the nature of the particular ethnicity).

Why I say Zionism is secular is because before Zionism, a Jew would be someone who practiced and lived by the Jewish religion, but by the turn of the 20th century, most Jews who did not practice the religion would identify themselves as German, Italian, etc etc. Zionism, before the war, was strongly opposed by most of the conservative religious Jews in Europe and considered to be a strange, radical movement at odds with the religion. This all changed during and after the war, of course, and today the majority of Zionists are not nearly so involved in the religion as self-identifying Jewish communities of the pre-war years were.

[frekk]

Originally Posted by Israelite9191

Zionism teaches that Israel needs to exist and that the are of historical Israel is the only legitimate place for Israel. Zionism does try to convince people of this, but that is not a religious statement.

Hasbara doesn't need to be religious to be evangelical.

e•van•gel•i•cal

Pronunciation: (ē"van-jel'i-kul, ev"un-), [key]
—adj.
1. Also,e"van•gel'ic.
2. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings.
3. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, esp. of the New Testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.
4. designating Christians, esp. of the late 1970s, eschewing the designation of fundamentalist but holding to a conservative interpretation of the Bible.
5. pertaining to certain movements in the Protestant churches in the 18th and 19th centuries that stressed the importance of personal experience of guilt for sin, and of reconciliation to God through Christ.
6. marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause.

[Israelite9191]

Frekk- If you live in the U.S. you should know that by Evangelical I refere to people such as Southern Baptists and other groups that have the positions I stated. If you do not, then we may have a culture gap as to the understanding of what Evangelism means.
Aslo, Zionism at first was only opposed by Hassids, not all Orthodox Jews. And yes, at the turn of the century Jews were starting to identify themselves by where they lived, bu that was only a brief period and before and after that all Jews identified themselves asJews first, mainly because the non-Jewish world would not let them identify themselves as Jews second, and also because the religion is inately tied to the people and vise versa.