Support NeoGAF

[el retorno]

The point is not just the the lives of many Arab israeli citizens suck or that they face challenges but that there is a state structure designed to give jews more rights than non-jews in israel. I keep linking to that site because he's a journalist who's lived in the area and is one the best sources on the topic. Most people don't pay as much attention to arabs in israel as they do to the refugees in gaza and the west bank. I didn't want to link to a straight up palestine or arab israeli site precisely to avoid having to defend the source. Cook is a journalist who came to work in the area and is somewhat more 'neutral'.

*shrug* there is more than enough sources of information in the links I've posted.

There are structures in a lot of state's that give certain groups certain benefits over others.
Its something a lot of state have to work on.

My only point was the hyperbole of the SA example with Arab citizens of Israel is extreme.

And no he's no "neutral" source.

 

[Blackhead]

There are structures in a lot of state's that give certain groups certain benefits over others.
Its something a lot of state have to work on.

My only point was the hyperbole of the SA example with Arab citizens of Israel is extreme.

And no he's no "neutral" source.

You don't see how having housing only for Jews is comparable to having whites only housing in Jim Crow era and white enclaves in apartheid south africa? really?

 

[Lerozz]

I don't think you understand the magnitude of the Irgun and the Lehi. The decolonisation process was fucking wild in Africa and the Middle East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo-Haifa_train_bombings_1948

Thanks for pointing those out to me, honestly, but I still don't think that this makes Hamas, or their brothers in arms for that matter, shine in a much better light. Not in any way playing those acts down, mind you. I stick to my previous statement though that bad things happened on both sides. Weighing one against the other does not make either better.

 

[Funky Papa]

I would never try to put Hamas in good light. I just wanted to point that zionist paramilitary organisations were in no way better.

For all I care they are one and the same.

 

[Instigator]

It would have been amazingly improbable if Palestinians had not resorted to terrorism when the people who took their land had successfully used terror tactics against them (and the Brits).

 

[IpsoFacto]

If Israel's neighbours would actually grow up and stop attacking the country through firearms and Goebels-style agitprop...

 

[cousins]

You expected a reasonable discussion to come from this?

 

[Deified Data]

They have the right to exist, the Palestinians have the right to claim ownership of that land, Israel has the right to defend themselves, and the Palestinians have the right to defend themselves in turn.

 

[Indrid Cold1]

They have the right to exist and be recognised as a legitimate state. Might makes right, as it always has. Rome, British Empire, United States. The precedent has long been set.

 

[FrenchToastDisciple]

I have no idea, but the answer to the question doesn't have many practical implications as Israel isn't going anywhere.

 

[Deified Data]

They have the right to exist and be recognised as a legitimate state. Might makes right, as it always has. Rome, British Empire, United States. The precedent has long been set.

This is the closest to objective truth as we can get in the matter. Morality plays no role here. So long as Israel has the ability to defend itself, Israel has the right to exist.

 

[Tawpgun]

It might have been questionable at first for sure.

But its too late now. The thing Israel needs to do know is back the fuck up, keep to the land they were allocated, and RECOGNIZE PALESTINE.

 

[Alucrid]

I've always wondered how people who don't want Israel to exist would plan to disperse the current Israeli citizens. I mean, unless they just plan to kill them or something, but logistically it seems rather improbable to do.

 

[Karsticles]

If you take it, it's yours.

 

[Jenga]

I've always wondered how people who don't want Israel to exist would plan to disperse the current Israeli citizens. I mean, unless they just plan to kill them or something, but logistically it seems rather improbable to do.

essentially it'd reverse roles and put israelis in the situation of palestinians

of course most people would realize that would really fix nothing but this is gaf

 

[FLEABttn]

Do I have the legal or moral right to my own country?

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I believe yes to both. My question and I'm not sure how to word this without someone getting the idea that I'm trying to be anti-semetic or anything is:

Should Israel exist as a Jewish state? What I mean is how can I country be a free democracy but still try and keep one type of religion/ethnicity as the majority. In a free democracy wouldn't arabs be free to move in and change the demographics of that country over time? If they have safeguards to prevent that then is that truly a "free" country? If the US had kept its safeguards to maintain a white majority population indefinitely wouldn't that be a bad thing? So then isn't that a bad thing there? I'm confused...

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Well, the UN basically gave the Israelis the state in 1948.

So no, they don't have a legitimate right to their own state.

 

[thespot84]

Well, the UN basically gave the Israelis the state in 1948.

So no, they don't have a legitimate right to their own state.

so what scenario would give them a 'legitimate right'? What is a legitimate right? The country has defended itself from obliteration a number of times. As posted earlier, might makes right. Maybe the US should give all of its land back to the native americans...

And Mammoth, tyranny of the majority can be a very real thing, as can tyranny of the minority, and as such a fundamentalist (read: religiously identified) democracy is a flawed idea. Democracy requires equal representation of citizens, however that doesn't preclude the effects of said government encroaching on non-citizens.

If israel allowed the right of return, the demographic shift would happen practically overnight, and israel would cease to be a jewish state, therefore the rule of the majority/democracy is in this case a false promise.

Frankly, I don't think israel should claim to be a democracy, because its disingenuous, though the geopolitical implications of doing so would raise even worse problems, like losing backing from the US. I think the only solution to prevent the disenfranchisement of an entire class of people is a two state solution.

 

[RawPower]

It is a flawed argument to justify taking some land that was inhabited 2000 years ago. Just because you come from the same ancient lineage you still have no memory or identity related to that place. Places changes a lot in 2000 years and even if you had memory of it back then it would not be the same place today.
If it was a few generations apart then I would understand more. However like people have already said its already there so you cant really change that. Like the generation born after the settlers are not fault for being born and raised there even on occupied land.
Whats more important is to improve the conditions of the state and find a more fair solution to the situation today.

You are wrong. Most of Jewish culture/heritage is based on the culture they had while living in the Middle East. Assimilation into the cultures of their host countries was rare, and generally discouraged on both sides. To say that Jews have no identity related to that place is ignorant.

The ultimate irony is that most Palestinians are descendants of the Jews who stayed put, in the holy land. They just converted to Islam (and Christianity to a lesser degree) and started speaking Arabic.

To an extent, because many are also descendents of Arab conquerers from the 8th century. Many are also of Greek descent.

While many in the Jewish disapora can claim a similar ancestral lineage to the Holy Land, many are also just descendants of Jewish converts through the centuries.

Converts were rare for over 2000 years (except in the early Roman empire), and any conversions that happened later were likely just absorbed into the overall gene pool. Thus, the Israelite ancestry wasn't lost. Some Jews may be descendents of converts only (they would probably have to be recent converts for that to be possible), but certainly not "many" of them.

 

[RawPower]

Greek Jews were hit very hard when the Nazis conquered Greece.

For all those who say "today's Jews aren't necessarily related to the Jews of antiquity":

1) Genetic evidence is strongly in favor of the Jews being a relatively homogenous group, especially considering 2,000 years of exile.

2) If they were Jewish enough to be slaughtered as Jews, then they're Jewish enough to live in a country of Jews.

Bravo, sir.

I've always wondered how people who don't want Israel to exist would plan to disperse the current Israeli citizens. I mean, unless they just plan to kill them or something, but logistically it seems rather improbable to do.

Sadly, I think this is exactly what a lot of people would want to happen. Not on GAF mind you, but many in the overall anti-zionist camp. Anti-semitism is far from dead.

essentially it'd reverse roles and put israelis in the situation of palestinians

of course most people would realize that would really fix nothing but this is gaf

GAF is considerably more tame and rational relative to the other Israel/Palestinian conflict debate sites I've seen.

 

[Clipjoint]

If a Jew from New Jersey has more right over the land that a Palestinian family has lived in and farmed continuously for hundreds of years, then the entire state is illegitimate.

The natural comparison is to bring up the United States and the native Americans, but that shameful ethnic cleansing occurred and the people were virtually wiped out. The Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from Palestine still exist and must be given their rights. They still have keys to their homes. They're still being pushed out and killed and imprisoned without trial on a daily basis. How many other nations today have undefined borders and maintain the colonial project of the 19th and 20th century? It's a model we've rejected everywhere else in the world, but it's still acceptable in Israel alone. That should be anathema to any true Liberal, but it's accepted out of nothing more than ethnic chauvinism.

There is no need for a Jewish state. Jews in America live in complete security and immersion. The anti-Semitism of the 20th century is dead and gone (replaced for the most part by Islamophobia) so there is no need for Jews to have a spare country at the expense of another people.

How can anyone defend a state whose biggest threat to its existence is the number of babies born outside of a certain religion? The only way Israel can survive as a Jewish state is through further massacre and ethnic cleansing of any minorities, or through an entrenched system of Apartheid. No other options are on the table.

That's why we need to end the experiment and create one state where Jews, Muslims, and Christians can all live side by side and have equal rights. Secular democracy should be the goal for all nations, not ethnocracies.

 

[RawPower]

If a Jew from New Jersey has more right over the land that a Palestinian family has lived in and farmed continuously for hundreds of years, then the entire state is illegitimate.

Was this supposed to be directed at me?

The natural comparison is to bring up the United States and the native Americans, but that shameful ethnic cleansing occurred and the people were virtually wiped out. The Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from Palestine still exist and must be given their rights. They still have keys to their homes. They're still being pushed out and killed and imprisoned without trial on a daily basis. How many other nations today have undefined borders and maintain the colonial project of the 19th and 20th century? It's a model we've rejected everywhere else in the world, but it's still acceptable in Israel alone. That should be anathema to any true Liberal, but it's accepted out of nothing more than ethnic chauvinism.

Not quite. It's a little different in that ethnic Jews could also be considered natives (at least partially) to that land, because that's where a large part of their overall ancestry derives from. The fact that Jews inhabited Europe and other regions for the past 1,500 years or so doesn't change that.

There is no need for a Jewish state. Jews in America live in complete security and immersion. The anti-Semitism of the 20th century is dead and gone (replaced for the most part by Islamophobia) so there is no need for Jews to have a spare country at the expense of another people.

Ok, you're kidding yourself if you think anti-semitism is completely dead. Seriously. Just because nobody's throwing us in ovens anymore doesn't mean there aren't loads of people out there that hate our guts.

 

[Osietra]

There's a serious document-drama in this. Jewsy Shore. It could have blind-minded hatred and hot girls.

 

[Onemic]

It might have been questionable at first for sure.

But its too late now. The thing Israel needs to do know is back the fuck up, keep to the land they were allocated, and RECOGNIZE PALESTINE.

This. The problem would then be where the borders would be. Which I guess is sort of the whole issue in the first place.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

If instead of killing of the Native Americans we shipped them to South America. 200 years later they come back and demand all of New England. Should we give it back to them?

 

[Clipjoint]

Was this supposed to be directed at me?

Not directed at you specifically - it's just a reality.

It's a little different in that ethnic Jews could also be considered natives to that land, because that's where a large part of their ancestry derives from. The fact that Jews inhabited Europe and other regions for the past 1,500 years or so doesn't change that.

Their ancestry comes from Europe. That's where their father, grandfather, great grandfathers, great great grandfathers, etc all lived. Claiming that (those specific) ethnic Jews are not European and instead come from the Levant is in fact a 20th century anti-Semitic trope. No other people get to lay claim to a homeland because a fraction of a percentage of their DNA is shared with the people who live there currently. This is how Jews were cast out as "other" when they lived in European ghettos in the 1800s. It wasn't true then and it's not true now.

Ok, you're kidding yourself if you think anti-semitism is completely dead. Seriously. Just because nobody's throwing us in ovens anymore doesn't mean there aren't loads of people out there that hate our guts.

There are people who hate every other peoples' guts. Anti-Semitism as a worldwide movement like the days of Nazi Germany is completely dead. One or two assholes spray-painting swastikas on a synagogue is not nearly the same phenomenon. There exists a different form of hatred of Jews in the Arab countries, but that is directly tied to the events that led to the construction of Israel, and is once again unrelated to the degree of anti-Semitism that the world saw in the 19th and 20th centuries. And look at the difference between a Jew living in the United States (completely safe and secure) and a Jew living in Israel (surrounded by walls, completely paranoid). If Israel's existence is meant to give Jews a safe place to live, it's failing miserably.

 

[RawPower]

There's a serious document-drama in this. Jewsy Shore. It could have blind-minded hatred and hot girls.

I can't tell if this is meant to be a personal attack or not.

 

[nib95]

I don't think you understand the magnitude of the Irgun and the Lehi. The decolonisation process was fucking wild in Africa and the Middle East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo-Haifa_train_bombings_1948

Thank you. That and they actually assassinated prominent people including a British minister and UN mediator. If Hamas were involved in such massacres and assassinations, I think the US and other nations would destroy entire galaxies to get at them.

What if they come back 2,000 years later?

Stop it with that. You're ruining his far reaching loose point!

 

[Clipjoint]

If instead of killing of the Native Americans we shipped them to South America. 200 years later they come back and demand all of New England. Should we give it back to them?

What if they come back 2,000 years later?

 

[RawPower]

Not directed at you specifically - it's just a reality.

OK, fair enough.

Their ancestry comes from Europe. That's where their father, grandfather, great grandfathers, great great grandfathers, etc all lived. Claiming that (those specific) ethnic Jews are not European and instead come from the Levant is in fact a 20th century anti-Semitic trope. No other people get to lay claim to a homeland because a fraction of a percentage of their DNA is shared with the people who live there currently. This is how Jews were cast out as "other" when they lived in European ghettos in the 1800s. It wasn't true then and it's not true now.

They settled in Europe, but they are genetically, culturally, and historically tied to the Levant. They rarely mixed or assimilated in their host countries after they left Rome. Not to mention, they were expelled from numerous countries over the centuries and were constantly on the move. For this reason, I believe they have the right to identify themselves as Levantines. Just because this fact was used by antisemites doesn't make it untrue.

There are people who hate every other peoples' guts. Anti-Semitism as a worldwide movement like the days of Nazi Germany is completely dead. One or two assholes spray-painting swastikas on a synagogue is not nearly the same phenomenon. There exists a different form of hatred of Jews in the Arab countries, but that is directly tied to the events that led to the construction of Israel, and is once again unrelated to the degree of anti-Semitism that the world saw in the 19th and 20th centuries. And look at the difference between a Jew living in the United States (completely safe and secure) and a Jew living in Israel (surrounded by walls, completely paranoid). If Israel's existence is meant to give Jews a safe place to live, it's failing miserably.

These are some good points, but I contend that a lot can change over the course of one's lifetime. Just because America is safe for Jews NOW doesn't mean it always will be. You never know what might happen, and this is why I believe that Israel should exist as a backup plan just in case.

 

[dude]

Yes. The British Mandate of Palestine was divided as per the UN decision. Israel does not have the right to the occupied areas (Today, that's the 1967 green line, even though that's a different border than the one in the 1948 UN decision.)

EDIT: Hmm.. Many people here do not know much about the history of Israel I guess
This is in no way like the Native American situation...

 

[el retorno]

EDIT: Hmm.. Many people here do not know much about the history of Israel I guess
This is in no way like the Native American situation...

I was going to make this point. The fact that people think that Israel proper (the 47 borders) is like the native americans is silly.

 

[RawPower]

EDIT: Hmm.. Many people here do not know much about the history of Israel I guess
This is in no way like the Native American situation...

There are similarities, to be sure. However, to say they're exactly alike betrays a lack of understanding of the Jews' situation, imo.

For the record, I am NOT trying to defend any of the bad things that Israel has done. I just take issue with the notion that the Jewish identity, background, and heritage (genetic or otherwise) isn't predominantly tied to that region. That is why I feel the Native American comparison is flawed.

 

[dude]

There are similarities, to be sure. However, to say they're exactly alike betrays a lack of understanding of the situation, imo.

What similarities?

 

[RawPower]

What similarities?

Basically, the fact that the Arab inhabitants are being kicked out of their homes, having their villages destroyed, and are gradually being wiped out.

 

[dude]

Basically, the fact that the Arab inhabitants are being kicked out of their homes, having their villages destroyed, and are gradually being wiped out.

First of all, the Palestinians are not getting wiped out. This is hyperbole and a lie. Yes, Israel is committing horrible atrocities against them, but these are horrible enough without making up bullshit.

Second of all, the reason for these things is completely different - The reason the Native American were killed and driven of their lands has nothing to do with what is happening in Israel. It's absurd to imply that Israel is an example of colonialism. Israel is an example of a country holding conquered lands through excessive force and establishing a cruel military rule in those lands.

 

[storafötter]

You are wrong. Most of Jewish culture/heritage is based on the culture they had while living in the Middle East. Assimilation into the cultures of their host countries was rare, and generally discouraged on both sides. To say that Jews have no identity related to that place is ignorant.

I am not unknown to that, but I still don't think this heritage and claim is good enough. Even the most devout orthodox person who follows a certain lifestyle similar to 2000 years ago cannot be comparable to how people were 2000 years ago living in the same geographic area as things has changed since then. They can of course claim an identity to that ancient place thats been internalized through generations, culture, religion but their identity is not based on actual experience of that place. It is mostly based on accounts of others who were there before them.
If they themselves didn't live in that same area or their relatives 50-100 years ago I don't see the right to claim back their "lost" homeland. We just have to disagree then I suppose.

The Balkans is a good example of how different ethnicities, folk groups have been thrown around for centuries and still have difficulties in claiming their own territory to this day in the different Balkan countries.

 

[RawPower]

I am not unknown to that, but I still don't think this heritage and claim is good enough. Even the most devout orthodox person who follows a certain lifestyle similar to 2000 years ago cannot be comparable to how people were 2000 years ago living in the same geographic area as things has changed since then. They can of course claim an identity to that ancient place thats been internalized through generations, culture, religion but their identity is not based on actual experience of that place. If they themselves didn't live in that same area or their relatives 50-100 years ago I don't see the right to claim back their "lost" homeland.

True, and I agree. I was just saying that it shouldn't be frowned upon if Jews opt to identify themselves more closely with Israel or the Middle East in general, than whatever European country they inhabited last.

 

[squidyj]

If you take it, it's yours.

This holds up in court yes?

 

[dude]

I am not unknown to that, but I still don't think this heritage and claim is good enough. Even the most devout orthodox person who follows a certain lifestyle similar to 2000 years ago cannot be comparable to how people were 2000 years ago living in the same geographic area as it has changed since then. They could have an identity to the ancient place thats been internalized through generations, but their identity is not based on actual experience of the place. If they themselves didn't live in that same area or their relatives 50-100 years ago I don't see the right to claim back their "lost" homeland.

That's irrelevant though, because that's not the nature of Israel's legitimacy. The nature of it's legitimacy is through the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. The Jewish community in Palestine decided to agree and the Arab community for decline. Now, as this is a UN plan, it's not exactly binding on the Arab community, but all you really have to do to exist as a legitimate country is having other countries recognize your right to existence - Which is what this plan brought. The international community approved a Jewish state along side an Arab one in place of the British Mandate of Palestine. This is the reason Israel exists.
Many Jews in Israel are secular or even atheists, so nothing in there claim to legitimacy involved the bible. It's true the land was chosen because of it's historical ties to the Jewish heritage. They moved there en masse because of this heritage. But once there, they built cities and what not, they grew in numbers - and their number were enough to make a claim for a country legitimate.

The problem is what happened after that, but that has nothing to do with the right of Israel to exist - only its right to hold the conquered territories it occupies.

 

[RawPower]

The Balkans is a good example of how different ethnicities, folk groups have been thrown around for centuries and still have difficulties in claiming their own territory to this day in the different Balkan countries.

I am not familiar with the history of the Balkans since I am not of Balkan descent myself. I'll have to look into that.

 

[Xeke]

Random question. In Israel do they have the awesome things that Jewish people have provided in the USA like bagels and amazing pastrami/corned beef?

 

[dude]

Random question. In Israel do they have the awesome things that Jewish people have provided in the USA like bagels and amazing pastrami/corned beef?

There are bagels in Israel, they're sold by street vendors practically everywhere.

I am unaware of amazing pastrami or corned beef in Israel... I don't think most people even know what corned beef is. Pastrami is more common-place, but again, not really amazing.

 

[Sayah]

Most problems in the world today are a consequence of the colonial legacy. Nation-states, as well, are a pretty recent, contemporary phenomena and many of them are by-products of European colonialism.

I'm opposed to the very idea of nation-states as they are hardly useful constructions for a just and fair world order.

 

[dude]

Most problems in the world today are a consequence of the colonial legacy. Nation-states, as well, are a pretty contemporary phenomena and many of them are by-products of European colonialism.

I'm opposed to the very idea of nation-states as they are hardly useful constructions for a just and fair world order.

Being opposed to nation-states is nice and all, but it's nothing but an unrealistic dream. They're here, and they're here to stay for the foreseeable future. Any plan to actually end the conflict in Israel will involve nation-states, as horrible as they are.

 

[storafötter]

I am not familiar with the history of the Balkans since I am not of Balkan descent myself. I'll have to look into that.

Glad to hear your open mind on that part. I will say this I am not trying to say the people of Balkans or discriminated minorities in neightbouring countries are similar to Jewish people and their history (it is a unique situation). However the similarity I draw here is based on that a groups of ethnicities with a their identity, religion, language have been pushed around South of Europe away from their ancestors home due to the games of Empires, Nationalism and World Wars. Different ethnicities have been forced into others territory or been absorbed by others unable to claim their own. Of course most of these groups have their official nation state, but for those who live outside those boarders these lands has either become their new home or always been their home.

That's irrelevant though, because that's not the nature of Israel's legitimacy. The nature of it's legitimacy is through the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. The Jewish community in Palestine decided to agree and the Arab community for decline. Now, as this is a UN plan, it's not exactly binding on the Arab community, but all you really have to do to exist as a legitimate country is having other countries recognize your right to existence - Which is what this plan brought. The international community approved a Jewish state along side an Arab one in place of the British Mandate of Palestine. This is the reason Israel exists.
Many Jews in Israel are secular or even atheists, so nothing in there claim to legitimacy involved the bible. It's true the land was chosen because of it's historical ties to the Jewish heritage. They moved there en masse because of this heritage. But once there, they built cities and what not, they grew in numbers - and their number were enough to make a claim for a country legitimate.

The problem is what happened after that, but that has nothing to do with the right of Israel to exist - only its right to hold the conquered territories it occupies.

I was mostly pointing towards the non-secular reasons. Which is often brought up but not exactly Jewish people themselves, but conservative Christians who like to emphasize the recognition of the state based on Gods will for the people.
Fair enough I am already aware of the UN Plan, but thanks for the explanation still. I think it is fascinating how many Jews in Israel are secular or Athieists today which was definitely not something I had the impression of when I was young. I remember watching some interesting documentary about how atheists in Israel didn't want to stay registered as a believer of Judaism. Didn't you make a thread about something like that some years ago? being an Atheist.

 

[Sayah]

Being opposed to nation-states is nice and all, but it's nothing but an unrealistic dream. They're here, and they're here to stay for the foreseeable future. Any plan to actually end the conflict in Israel will involve nation-states, as horrible as they are.

I never said that they weren't here to stay for the foreseeable future. But I also know that world conflicts will continue to exist as long as the world works under this model. Ethnic conflicts that were minor or may have not existed in the past have now only been either created or exacerbated thanks to all of these recent developments. It's not just the nation-state but it's also the nation against the state and vice-versa. Many countries have a diverse population and constraining their variety of identities to a single national identity has only led to increased internal ethnic struggles as well.

 

[Clipjoint]

OK, fair enough.


They settled in Europe, but they are genetically, culturally, and historically tied to the Levant. They rarely mixed or assimilated in their host countries after they left Rome. Just because this fact was used by antisemites doesn't make it untrue.


These are some good points, but I contend that a lot can change over the course of one's lifetime. Just because America is safe for Jews NOW doesn't mean it always will be. You never know what might happen, and this is why I believe that Israel should exist as a backup plan just in case.

Genetically, the connection is tenuous at best, specifically when the native inhabitants are the measuring stick. They judge the ancestry of European Jews by matching their DNA to Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians, who are likely the real descendants of the Jews who lived in the region (and converted to Christianity and then eventually Islam.) If ancestry to the land is all it takes to give one claim over the land, the European Jews should be far down the list.

Culturally? The Jews of Europe spoke Yiddish, which they dropped in favor of Hebrew during the Zionist project. Their cultural foods are found more readily in New York than in Israel, where there is an attempt to co-opt the foods of the native population and re-brand them as Israeli (such as hummus and "Israeli salad"). Israeli culture is radically different from the Jewish culture that you claim held together the Jewish populations of Europe for 1500 years.

Even the historical claims are largely mythical, as they are based more on Biblical mythology than actual history and archaeology. Jerusalem was built before Judaism was an actual religion, (likely) by the ancient Canaanites. Real history shows that the peoples of the land were constantly shifting, with a number of different rulers, none of which match the Biblical stories. Abraham never existed. Moses never existed. The slave exodus never happened. David was never a great king. Jericho's walls didn't come crumbling down like the stories tell us.

But that is all nitpicking. Your last point that Jews specifically need a spare country for eternity because of the Holocaust doesn't pass its muster. The list of persecuted peoples is endless - we don't use that as an excuse to ethnically cleanse one group of people to make room for another people in any case other than Israel. Once again, the idea of Israel as a Jewish nation for a Jewish people inherently means that it can never be democratic, can never shed and evolve beyond its bloody history, and will always be a pariah state that endangers Jews more than it protects them. That's why you have liberal American Jews en masse rejecting Israel as their "birthright." Their liberal values trump their ethnocentrism, and rightfully so.

 

[Ecotic]

Israel is the only country where people are so obsessed with how it came to be.

There's plenty of other countries that are controversial in their existence, but few people in the West are even aware of this due to the heavy emphasis in the Western news media towards reporting just Europe and the Middle East when it comes to 'world news reporting'. Half of the countries in Southeast Asia are controversial in their existence, for example. Substantial numbers in Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos don't think the other countries have any right to exist at all, and indeed without Western colonial meddling half of those countries probably wouldn't.

But again, Americans don't know this because they're predominantly Christian and therefore the world as they know it is only places where Abrahamic religion dominate - predominantly Europe and the Middle East.