The "pro-Palestinian" and anti-Zionist Left have for decades depicted religious Jews as nutjobs from the Dark Ages and the Torah as nothing more than a bunch of ancient superstition and claptrap. Certainly no one on the Left gives any credence to the numerous passages about Jews originating in Israel and God designating that land for the Jewish people (maybe Beinart can weigh in on those passages and why they shouldn't be listened to?). But now we're suddenly supposed to believe a very creative interpretation of one particular Torah passage, solely because it suddenly can be seen as helpful for Palestine's narrative? Ridiculous.
Even taking the entire argument at face value (which we should not based on the larger context), Beinart fails entirely. The Israelites were enslaved by Pharaoh and the Egyptians for no reason, while the Palestinians and their Arab allies started the war "of extermination" against Israel and succeeded in killing 1% of Israel's population. Usually it's the people who start the war that pay the reparations. Just ask the Germans and the Japanese.
Furthermore, even if you think Israel should pay reparations to Palestine, the Torah literally says "gold and silver." It doesn't say land and houses, and in Exodus the Egyptians didn't give the Israelites their houses. They let them go live in a country of their own. But let me guess, that part of the Torah isn't relevant any more?
Face it, Peter, you're just doing what people have done for thousands of years: picking and choose parts of the Bible to justify your pre-existing narrative. You would laugh out of the room a Zionist commentator who quoted Genesis 15:18 "On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates"". Enough with the double standards.
"The Israelites were enslaved by Pharaoh and the Egyptians for no reason" other than, as the Old Testament clearly shows, their labour. No-one goes to the bother of enslaving other humans for no reason - it involves a lot of work to provide food and accommodation if nothing else.
It's refreshing and disgusting at the same time that you admit that Zionists' moral claim to occupy Palestine is based on nothing more than those OT stories about "God designating that land for the Jewish people". You didn't mention the many accounts of the Yahweh-authorised genocide against the peoples living in the cities of Canaan, in which every child, woman and man had to be slaughtered simply because they had the temerity to worship their own gods.
As for Israel/Palestine wars in the present period: "At least 10,299 Palestinians and 1,286 Israelis have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000. At least 2,340 Palestinian children and 136 Israeli children have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000." (https://israelpalestinetimeline.org/charts/)
The point I was trying to make is that Peter was saying in his piece that the Israelites deserved reparations for their suffering, but it's not that simple. A wrong was inflicted upon the Israelites through no fault of their own, unlike the Palestinians, who started the war.
I admitted nothing of the kind, I just responded to Peter's argument that people in the modern day should follow the teachings of the Torah. If he thinks we should follow it to give reparations to the Palestinians, then we should also follow it that God gave the land to the Jewish people. Again, he's the one saying we should follow the Torah, not me.
"You didn't mention the many accounts of the Yahweh-authorised genocide against the peoples living in the cities of Canaan, "
What would be the point of bringing those accounts up, other than to spread hatred and anti-Semitism?
"the Palestinians, who started the war" - is to omit the rather enormous elephant in that particular room: the illegal occupation of Palestine by settler-colonial Zionists, from the 1948 Nakba onwards.
The point of bringing to your attention the OT genocide of Canaanites by the declared ancestors of Zionists was to show the basis for the illegal occupation has no historical foundation. Unless you think that mass slaughter of Indigenous people - as in the USA - is a fair and just act. As for hatred and anti-Semitism, Zionists do all they can to create and spread those, not least through apartheid Israel's growing friendship with the far Right around the world which loves the idea of a segregated ghetto for Jews only.
"The declared ancestors of Zionists"? You mean Jews, James, so just say Jews.
Even if you consider the Torah to be historical fact, which I do not, the "declared ancestors of Zionists" originated in Israel and then came back to it after the Exodus, which blows your "no historical foundation" argument out of the water. Every historian and archeologist agrees that the Jewish people originated in Israel, and that's what I'm interested in, historical fact, not prehistoric fairy tales.
Do you believe everything the Torah says, James, or just the sections you can use to demonize Jews and Israel?
"the "declared ancestors of Zionists" originated in Israel - but how did they come to be living there in the first place? I was brought up in an evangelical Christian family in the UK, so I was made to read and learn most of the Bible. Consequently, I learned how the 'Children of Israel' left Egypt and occupied Canaan by killing the Indigenous peoples. Whether that's historical fact I don't know, but it's the origin story that Zionists use to justify occupying modern Palestine, forcing the Palestinian people to leave at gunpoint, and treating them as last-class people to this day.
It's interesting to observe on this blog the amount of time and effort by variously-named Zionists being put into countering Peter's truthful entries and my comments showing the reality of what Zionism means for Palestinians. This is all of a piece with the desperate Zionist propaganda campaigns being waged all around the world against anyone, Jewish or non-Jewish, who stands up for Palestinian rights, whether that is Jeremy Corbyn in 2020 or the actress Emma Watson in 2022.
It seems that the Israeli government has plenty of funds to support these campaigns, and I suspect that the commenters here on this blog are just one part of them. As for me, the more you write, the more I'm convinced of the justice of the Palestinian case. I had no interest in the conflict at all until the last few years; it was what I couldn't deny was happening, what I saw reported and the sheer brazenness of the IDF's lethal repression against the Palestinian people that brought me to begin campaigning. That's true of growing numbers of people. New groups such as the UK's superb Palestine Action (which has been directly stopping the activities of Elbit Systems, campaigns upheld by the courts) are evidence of how apartheid Israel is losing its war bit by bit as more people see what is going on.
The origin story Zionists use is the historical fact that the Jewish people originated in Israel, which is based on history, genetics and archeology. That you freely admit you "don't know historical fact" is very consistent with your many comments on this subject.
If you want to talk about the Palestinian cause, we can talk about the Palestinian cause, but it's pretty clear to me you're doing what you always do: bring up other topics because you cannot make an actual argument about the subject at hand.
"I was brought up in an evangelical Christian family in the UK". You said in an earlier comment you're Jewish. You might want to keep your story straight if you want to convince anyone of anything.
Apparently Beinart isn’t very familiar with the population he’s endeavoring to speak for. Some data for his education:
‘Two-thirds of Gazans say Palestinians should accept that the “right of return” not apply to Israel, but only to the West Bank and Gaza, if that is the price of a Palestinian state. When asked about their own personal preferences, a mere 14 percent say they would “probably” want to move to Israel, even if they could. Moreover, the overwhelming majority, 79 percent, would accept the “permanent resettlement” of Palestinians from other countries in just the West Bank or Gaza, “even if that is not where their families originally came from.” A solid if somewhat smaller majority, 59 percent, say it would be a good idea if “Arab states offered extra economic aid in order to resettle Palestinian refugees in the West Bank or Gaza, but not inside Israel.” ‘
‘Attitudes on these questions are also relatively moderate, though more mixed, in the West Bank. West Bankers are approximately evenly split on the suggestion that refugees not enter Israel: 48 percent would accept this suggestion, though 52 percent are opposed. But a mere 5 percent say they would probably move to Israel even if they could. Moreover, two-thirds would accept the permanent resettlement of diaspora Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza even if their families originated inside Israel.’
Furthermore, Beinart’s assurances that a “one state” would result in peace and human rights instead of civil war and ethnic cleansing would be laughably naive if it wasn’t so obscene. Some more poll results:
As of 2021, only 10% of Palestinians want a one state with equal rights between Jews and Muslims:
Let’s ask some Palestinian and Arab thought leaders, one would think that Beinart would listen to them if no one else:
"It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews [in a one state solution] is very difficult for me. I really don't know." -Edward Said
“If the refugees were to return…you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” –Omar Barghouti quoting Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al Quds University.
"In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly - the intention is the extermination of Israel." - Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister, October 11, 1949
"If the refugees return to Israel - Israel will cease to exist." - Gamal Abdel Nasser, 1961
"The day on which the Arab hope for the return of the refugees to Palestine is realized will be the day of Israel's extermination." - Abdallah al-Yafi, Lebanese Prime Minister
But why should Beinart care? He doesn’t live in Israel. He won’t be the one at risk of “extermination” should the one state solution fall apart. It isn’t his sons and daughters at risk of being blown up, shot or stabbed to death because they aren’t Arabs. He won’t be thrown out of his house because it was “stolen” from a Palestinian.
The idea that anyone should listen to him when he says “just let the Palestinians in and everything will be fine” is absurd. The Palestinians say the exact opposite. As I said last time, maybe Beinart should delete his substack and make room for actual Palestinian voices in the media, since he clearly is out of touch with what they actually want and actually think. It’s very ironic that after complaining just a few days ago about how Palestinian voices aren’t represented, he’s now trying to speak for them.
It's a bit odd that you claim that Palestinians are a violent group. The statistics prove otherwise:
"At least 10,303 Palestinians and 1,286 Israelis have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000. At least 2,341 Palestinian children and 136 Israeli children have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000."
Your fear-mongering and stereotyping of Palestinian people are hardly conducive to your case for keeping apartheid in Israel.
I never said the Palestinians are a violent group or that “apartheid” should be “kept” in Israel. Once again you are misrepresenting my views and being dishonest. Face it, the only one who has a hatred of an entire people here is you and maybe Beinart.
But since we’re throwing numbers around, here’s a couple for you:
50% of Palestinians support a return to armed intifada, and 48% support dissolving the PA.
I would never describe the Palestinians as a “violent group” based on this, but the Israelis don’t have the luxury of ignoring threats to their lives and the lives of their children. Unlike you and Beinart.
"I never said the Palestinians are a violent group". Fine. Then you're happy for Israel to become a democracy with equal rights for all Palestinian people?
Given the overwhelming tide of repressive, murderous violence being enacted by the IDF against the Palestinian people, it is no surprise that they want to rise up against it. Why wouldn't they? It's entirely legitimate, unlike the US-supplied and -funded destruction of Palestinian people and property. The threats to life are generally in the direction of those people, not to Israelis. The statistics I supplied you show that as clear as day.
As for the PA, it needs to be dissolved. It's always been a stooge of the Israeli state. "Since the 1990s, the Oslo Accords — which established the PA as a subcontractor for the occupation — have tried to turn the Palestinian cause into an administrative matter rather than a struggle for freedom. The PA led us to believe that the maximum we should aim to achieve in our lives is an Israeli-issued permit, or a successful coordination for medical treatment in an Israeli hospital. This is a passive approach that pretends that our problem is merely with daily logistical issues, and that by just solving these matters, Palestinians will be satisfied.
The recent uprising has shown how much the PA’s approach is out of touch with its people. In fact, the PA is perhaps the only Palestinian institution left that seriously believes that a two-state solution can be fulfilled, or that the Oslo Accords can provide a path toward any kind of liberation."
So first you say there is no security threat, now you’re saying there is violence but it’s all justified and legitimate. Maybe you should figure out what you actually believe beyond just “Israel bad.”
An uprising against a repressive government is indeed a security threat to that state. However, even you would admit that such an uprising is morally justifiable. Would you deny that, say, the uprising by Jews in 73-74 CE against the repressive Roman state at Masada should be condemned because it posed a security threat to the Roman empire?
Good, we agree that there is a security threat. You think it’s a justified threat, I think it’s not. There’s nothing more to discuss. Thank you for your contributions.
I like where you’re going with the idea of how such a magnanimous gesture of reparations, rooted in Torah, could inspire a paradigm shift in relations and reconciliation. However, what is missing here is the culpability of other Arab state actors in this. These reparations are not the responsibility of Israel alone. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria should be part of the offering plan. Furthermore, I think your frame is a bit anachronistic in that your looking at things from a 2021 perspective, where a chasm of power and societal development has grown quite wide since 1947. We must not forget the balance of power between the warring parties in 1947. Your presentation makes the Palestinians absolutely acted upon, as subjugated entirely against their will. That stripping of their agency in the roots of the conflict helps no one to better appreciate the complexity.
I don't read Moses' directive in Deuteronomy as requiring "reparations." Slavery and other forms of servitude were an accepted part of ancient societies. Instead, the directive is more likely to simply mean that releasing a slave without providing some way for them to survive would be cruel and inhumane, in some ways worse than remaining a slave, since the master had some obligation to provide at least subsistence. This is similar to efforts to provide transition and support to convicts after they are released from prison. Reparations are something else, and would be relevant in the case of people who were wrongly imprisoned.
"Israel believes “the influx of millions of Palestinians into Israel would pose a threat to its national security.”" No doubt that is true from the perspective of a Zionist who wants Israel to remain as it is: an undemocratic, apartheid, ethno-nationalist state which privileges white Jewish people well above any other. The question is, of course, whether that is a valid state for any nation to defend.
- "It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews [in a one state solution] is very difficult for me. I really don't know." -Edward Said
- “If the refugees were to return…you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” –Omar Barghouti quoting Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al Quds University.
- "In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly - the intention is the extermination of Israel." - Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister, October 11, 1949
- "If the refugees return to Israel - Israel will cease to exist." - Gamal Abdel Nasser, 1961
- "The day on which the Arab hope for the return of the refugees to Palestine is realized will be the day of Israel's extermination." - Abdallah al-Yafi, Lebanese Prime Minister
I suppose you expect us to believe Omar Barghouti and Gamal Nasser are Zionists now?
Indeed. Israel as it is today - racist, apartheid, capitalist, ethno-nationalist, privileging white Jewish people - and as it was from the 1948 Nakba has no moral right to exist. Why should it? Many Jewish people don't want that to exist either. Far-right anti-Semites, many of whom the Israeli state has been courting over the last few years, love the idea of a single place for Jews to live in, segregated from non-Jews. That gives the anti-Semites a great reason to expel Jewish people.
As for Edward Said:
"As Edward Said puts it, Oslo “set the stage for separation,” yet permanent peace can happen only with a binational Israeli-Palestinian state... Edward Said described the claim that Palestine is “principally and exclusively” Arab as a nationalistic myth and a radical simplification of “a land of many histories”. This is not to feed the Zionist myth either, but it is to acknowledge the rich multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious nature of Palestine which is perpetually threatened by Zionist hegemony.
... the problem is that Palestinian self-determination in a separate state is unworkable, just as unworkable as the principle of separation between a demographically mixed, irreversibly connected Arab population without sovereignty and a Jewish population with it. The question, I believe, is not how to devise means for persisting in trying to separate them but to see whether it is possible for them to live together as fairly and peacefully as possible… There can be no reconciliation unless both peoples, two communities of suffering, resolve that their existence is a secular fact, and that it has to be dealt with as such.
This does not mean a diminishing of Jewish life as Jewish life or a surrendering of Palestinian Arab aspirations and political existence. On the contrary, it means self-determination for both peoples. But it does mean being willing to soften, lessen and finally give up special status for one people at the expense of the other."
Is the idea of Jewish people living in equality and harmony with others - specifically Palestinian Arab people - so revolting to you that you cannot even consider the notion?
Once again you are unable to respond to my argument that the Palestinian refugees do in fact pose a security concern to the Israelis, and it isn’t just Zionists who say so. Thank you for being honest and admitting that you don’t want a Jewish state to exist and that you see the refugees as a tool to accomplish that task. I wish Beinart could be just as honest as you.
And if a few million Israelis (or as you would describe them, “racist, apartheid, capitalist, ethno-nationalist, privileging white Jewish people”) get killed in the process, that’s not a bug, that’s a feature. After all, they’re just Jews, right?
"Palestinian refugees do in fact pose a security concern to the Israelis" based on no evidence apart from the obvious fact that the apartheid, ethno-religious state will eventually have to give way and become a normal democracy. You clearly believe that, given the slightest weakness on the part of the Zionist state, the Palestinian people would kill every Jew in sight. Yet strangely, the evidence is utterly in the opposite direction. The facts of the numbers killed and injured show clearly that Israel is a violent, repressive state against Palestinians.
There are plenty of Jewish people who, like me, do not want Israel to stay a non-democracy, a segregated ghetto for Jews, allied to far-right anti-Semites and to theocracies such as Saudi Arabia. If you regard that as a satisfactory status quo, it's no wonder that millions of people around the world are actively campaigning to destroy it.
Evidence has been provided to you already. If you choose not to look at it, or to listen to the words of Palestinians and other Arab leaders, that is your problem, not mine. You are three for three on misrepresenting my arguments, I never said or believe that “the Palestinian people would kill every Jew in sight.” Lying like that only shows the weakness in your point of view, not strength.
As I said, if you choose to ignore the decades of terrorism carried out by Palestinians against the Israelis, you and Beinart have that privilege. But the Israelis don’t, and calling them names isn’t going to change their minds either.
Since you seem so certain that a one state will result in equal rights for everyone, perhaps you can provide evidence that the Palestinian government treats its people with equal rights at this moment, including women, non-Muslims, LGBT people, and dissenters? While you’re at it, maybe you can address the polls that show vast majorities of Palestinians want sharia law and don’t want equal rights in their state.
Given your claim that, to make Israel a democracy would entail "a few million Israelis ... getting killed" by Palestinian people, certainly that means you think that the Palestinians are inherently more violent than the allegedly peaceable Zionists. Once again, I point you to the figures I supplied you with earlier.
As for your allegations about Palestinian oppression of their own people, it is as inexcusable as Israeli oppression, apartheid, racism and other forms of discrimination which you didn't even try to deny. Both sides have plenty of darkness.
"Is the idea of Jewish people living in equality and harmony with others - specifically Palestinian Arab people - so revolting to you that you cannot even consider the notion?"
James, there are literally dozens of nation-states that exist in the world today. They are all "ethno nationalist" and "privilege" their nation over others.
To strip the Jewish people and only the Jewish people of their state would deny them numerous rights such as a voice and vote at the UN. Stripping the Jewish people of their state would make them UNEQUAL to dozens of other nations such as the Germans, Japanese, Syrians, Turks, Greeks, Poles, Armenians, Hungarians, etc. etc. etc. So maybe you should answer your own question. Why don't you want the Jewish people to be equal to all of these other nations?
Ah... the standard response: Israel may treat Palestinians appallingly, but other nations treat people worse. Well, at least you're honest about the apartheid now. No nation apart from Israel is openly and constitutionally for one ethnic group. The last one was South Africa, with which apartheid Israel was a close ally, even to the point of offering it nuclear weapons. Jewish people would still be living in Israel if they wanted to; only they would not have legal superiority over anyone else. The armed forces would protect everyone, not just Jewish people.
All citizens would have equal civil and human rights. If you think that is a threat against Jews, the rest of the world disagrees.
James, you've made it clear that your problem is with Israel's existence as a Jewish state, so let's not bring in non sequiturs like its treatment of Palestinians and the rights of its citizens. Even if every Palestinian on Earth was living happily and content, you'd still want Israel destroyed.
"No nation apart from Israel is openly and constitutionally for one ethnic group."
This is so incredibly untrue it's amazing you even typed it out. I could link you to over a dozen constitutions of various nation states that explicitly state they are for one ethnic group. I'll give you one to start, and if you continue to push this lie, I'll give you some more.
Constitution of Palestine: "Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation. Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve..... Islam is the official religion in Palestine...The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a principal source of legislation".
Please, James, can you answer my question? Would stripping the Jewish people of their representation and vote at the UN make them EQUAL or UNEQUAL to the dozens of other nations represented at the UN? It's a simple question, so why can't you give me a simple answer?
“ Zionist who wants Israel to remain as it is: an undemocratic, apartheid, ethno-nationalist state which privileges white Jewish people well above any other.” This statement is not factually correct. If it was, there wouldn’t be “non-white, non-Jewish” citizens of Israel able to express themselves. But in fact, parliament has a diversity of representative voices, including non-Jewish ministers. Similarly, many institutions in the country include non-white and non-Jews at the highest levels.
Your statement is regurgitated bluster that isn’t rooted in the facts on the ground, but rather in rhetoric and blind hatred for Zionism.
I was referring to the actual status of people living in apartheid Israel who don't have the privileged status of being white and Jewish. It isn't even good enough to be Jewish. For example: "Since arriving in Israel, many Ethiopian Jews have faced constant discrimination. Their faith was questioned by rabbis and their communities ostracized from the rest of Israeli society. In 1990, the National Israeli Blood Bank routinely destroyed blood donated by Ethiopian Israelis because they were “afraid that the Ethiopians carried HIV.” There was a cap on the number of Ethiopian Jews entering Israel until relatively recently.
The minority status of the Ethiopian Jewish community creates poor material conditions. They have the highest poverty rate among the Jewish population in Israel, and face the highest levels of police violence after Palestinians. Israel calls itself a bastion of human rights and progress, while denying rights to both Palestinians and Ethiopian Jews. The treatment of Ethiopian Jews is completely different from the warm welcome offered to Jewish people from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, for instance."
As for the so-called diversity in apartheid Israel:
"New Basic Law approved by a Knesset vote of 62-55 has distinct apartheid characteristics and requires racist acts as a constitutional value.
The Israeli Knesset voted 62 to 55 early today, Thursday, 19 July 2018, to approve the Jewish Nation-State Basic Law that constitutionally enshrines the identity of the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
This law guarantees the ethnic-religious character of Israel as exclusively Jewish and entrenches the privileges enjoyed by Jewish citizens, while simultaneously anchoring discrimination against Palestinian citizens and legitimizing exclusion, racism, and systemic inequality. The Jewish Nation-State Basic Law is the “law of laws” capable of overriding any ordinary legislation."
The "pro-Palestinian" and anti-Zionist Left have for decades depicted religious Jews as nutjobs from the Dark Ages and the Torah as nothing more than a bunch of ancient superstition and claptrap. Certainly no one on the Left gives any credence to the numerous passages about Jews originating in Israel and God designating that land for the Jewish people (maybe Beinart can weigh in on those passages and why they shouldn't be listened to?). But now we're suddenly supposed to believe a very creative interpretation of one particular Torah passage, solely because it suddenly can be seen as helpful for Palestine's narrative? Ridiculous.
Even taking the entire argument at face value (which we should not based on the larger context), Beinart fails entirely. The Israelites were enslaved by Pharaoh and the Egyptians for no reason, while the Palestinians and their Arab allies started the war "of extermination" against Israel and succeeded in killing 1% of Israel's population. Usually it's the people who start the war that pay the reparations. Just ask the Germans and the Japanese.
Furthermore, even if you think Israel should pay reparations to Palestine, the Torah literally says "gold and silver." It doesn't say land and houses, and in Exodus the Egyptians didn't give the Israelites their houses. They let them go live in a country of their own. But let me guess, that part of the Torah isn't relevant any more?
Face it, Peter, you're just doing what people have done for thousands of years: picking and choose parts of the Bible to justify your pre-existing narrative. You would laugh out of the room a Zionist commentator who quoted Genesis 15:18 "On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates"". Enough with the double standards.
"The Israelites were enslaved by Pharaoh and the Egyptians for no reason" other than, as the Old Testament clearly shows, their labour. No-one goes to the bother of enslaving other humans for no reason - it involves a lot of work to provide food and accommodation if nothing else.
It's refreshing and disgusting at the same time that you admit that Zionists' moral claim to occupy Palestine is based on nothing more than those OT stories about "God designating that land for the Jewish people". You didn't mention the many accounts of the Yahweh-authorised genocide against the peoples living in the cities of Canaan, in which every child, woman and man had to be slaughtered simply because they had the temerity to worship their own gods.
As for Israel/Palestine wars in the present period: "At least 10,299 Palestinians and 1,286 Israelis have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000. At least 2,340 Palestinian children and 136 Israeli children have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000." (https://israelpalestinetimeline.org/charts/)
The point I was trying to make is that Peter was saying in his piece that the Israelites deserved reparations for their suffering, but it's not that simple. A wrong was inflicted upon the Israelites through no fault of their own, unlike the Palestinians, who started the war.
I admitted nothing of the kind, I just responded to Peter's argument that people in the modern day should follow the teachings of the Torah. If he thinks we should follow it to give reparations to the Palestinians, then we should also follow it that God gave the land to the Jewish people. Again, he's the one saying we should follow the Torah, not me.
"You didn't mention the many accounts of the Yahweh-authorised genocide against the peoples living in the cities of Canaan, "
What would be the point of bringing those accounts up, other than to spread hatred and anti-Semitism?
"the Palestinians, who started the war" - is to omit the rather enormous elephant in that particular room: the illegal occupation of Palestine by settler-colonial Zionists, from the 1948 Nakba onwards.
The point of bringing to your attention the OT genocide of Canaanites by the declared ancestors of Zionists was to show the basis for the illegal occupation has no historical foundation. Unless you think that mass slaughter of Indigenous people - as in the USA - is a fair and just act. As for hatred and anti-Semitism, Zionists do all they can to create and spread those, not least through apartheid Israel's growing friendship with the far Right around the world which loves the idea of a segregated ghetto for Jews only.
"The declared ancestors of Zionists"? You mean Jews, James, so just say Jews.
Even if you consider the Torah to be historical fact, which I do not, the "declared ancestors of Zionists" originated in Israel and then came back to it after the Exodus, which blows your "no historical foundation" argument out of the water. Every historian and archeologist agrees that the Jewish people originated in Israel, and that's what I'm interested in, historical fact, not prehistoric fairy tales.
Do you believe everything the Torah says, James, or just the sections you can use to demonize Jews and Israel?
"the "declared ancestors of Zionists" originated in Israel - but how did they come to be living there in the first place? I was brought up in an evangelical Christian family in the UK, so I was made to read and learn most of the Bible. Consequently, I learned how the 'Children of Israel' left Egypt and occupied Canaan by killing the Indigenous peoples. Whether that's historical fact I don't know, but it's the origin story that Zionists use to justify occupying modern Palestine, forcing the Palestinian people to leave at gunpoint, and treating them as last-class people to this day.
It's interesting to observe on this blog the amount of time and effort by variously-named Zionists being put into countering Peter's truthful entries and my comments showing the reality of what Zionism means for Palestinians. This is all of a piece with the desperate Zionist propaganda campaigns being waged all around the world against anyone, Jewish or non-Jewish, who stands up for Palestinian rights, whether that is Jeremy Corbyn in 2020 or the actress Emma Watson in 2022.
It seems that the Israeli government has plenty of funds to support these campaigns, and I suspect that the commenters here on this blog are just one part of them. As for me, the more you write, the more I'm convinced of the justice of the Palestinian case. I had no interest in the conflict at all until the last few years; it was what I couldn't deny was happening, what I saw reported and the sheer brazenness of the IDF's lethal repression against the Palestinian people that brought me to begin campaigning. That's true of growing numbers of people. New groups such as the UK's superb Palestine Action (which has been directly stopping the activities of Elbit Systems, campaigns upheld by the courts) are evidence of how apartheid Israel is losing its war bit by bit as more people see what is going on.
The origin story Zionists use is the historical fact that the Jewish people originated in Israel, which is based on history, genetics and archeology. That you freely admit you "don't know historical fact" is very consistent with your many comments on this subject.
If you want to talk about the Palestinian cause, we can talk about the Palestinian cause, but it's pretty clear to me you're doing what you always do: bring up other topics because you cannot make an actual argument about the subject at hand.
"I was brought up in an evangelical Christian family in the UK". You said in an earlier comment you're Jewish. You might want to keep your story straight if you want to convince anyone of anything.
Apparently Beinart isn’t very familiar with the population he’s endeavoring to speak for. Some data for his education:
‘Two-thirds of Gazans say Palestinians should accept that the “right of return” not apply to Israel, but only to the West Bank and Gaza, if that is the price of a Palestinian state. When asked about their own personal preferences, a mere 14 percent say they would “probably” want to move to Israel, even if they could. Moreover, the overwhelming majority, 79 percent, would accept the “permanent resettlement” of Palestinians from other countries in just the West Bank or Gaza, “even if that is not where their families originally came from.” A solid if somewhat smaller majority, 59 percent, say it would be a good idea if “Arab states offered extra economic aid in order to resettle Palestinian refugees in the West Bank or Gaza, but not inside Israel.” ‘
‘Attitudes on these questions are also relatively moderate, though more mixed, in the West Bank. West Bankers are approximately evenly split on the suggestion that refugees not enter Israel: 48 percent would accept this suggestion, though 52 percent are opposed. But a mere 5 percent say they would probably move to Israel even if they could. Moreover, two-thirds would accept the permanent resettlement of diaspora Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza even if their families originated inside Israel.’
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/state-palestinians-would-cede-right-return-and-more
Furthermore, Beinart’s assurances that a “one state” would result in peace and human rights instead of civil war and ethnic cleansing would be laughably naive if it wasn’t so obscene. Some more poll results:
As of 2021, only 10% of Palestinians want a one state with equal rights between Jews and Muslims:
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/what-do-palestinians-want
89% of Palestinians want Islamic law - Sharia - to be the law of their state.
https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/
Let’s ask some Palestinian and Arab thought leaders, one would think that Beinart would listen to them if no one else:
"It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews [in a one state solution] is very difficult for me. I really don't know." -Edward Said
“If the refugees were to return…you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” –Omar Barghouti quoting Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al Quds University.
"In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly - the intention is the extermination of Israel." - Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister, October 11, 1949
"If the refugees return to Israel - Israel will cease to exist." - Gamal Abdel Nasser, 1961
"The day on which the Arab hope for the return of the refugees to Palestine is realized will be the day of Israel's extermination." - Abdallah al-Yafi, Lebanese Prime Minister
But why should Beinart care? He doesn’t live in Israel. He won’t be the one at risk of “extermination” should the one state solution fall apart. It isn’t his sons and daughters at risk of being blown up, shot or stabbed to death because they aren’t Arabs. He won’t be thrown out of his house because it was “stolen” from a Palestinian.
The idea that anyone should listen to him when he says “just let the Palestinians in and everything will be fine” is absurd. The Palestinians say the exact opposite. As I said last time, maybe Beinart should delete his substack and make room for actual Palestinian voices in the media, since he clearly is out of touch with what they actually want and actually think. It’s very ironic that after complaining just a few days ago about how Palestinian voices aren’t represented, he’s now trying to speak for them.
It's a bit odd that you claim that Palestinians are a violent group. The statistics prove otherwise:
"At least 10,303 Palestinians and 1,286 Israelis have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000. At least 2,341 Palestinian children and 136 Israeli children have been killed by someone from the other side since 2000."
Your fear-mongering and stereotyping of Palestinian people are hardly conducive to your case for keeping apartheid in Israel.
https://israelpalestinetimeline.org/charts/
I never said the Palestinians are a violent group or that “apartheid” should be “kept” in Israel. Once again you are misrepresenting my views and being dishonest. Face it, the only one who has a hatred of an entire people here is you and maybe Beinart.
But since we’re throwing numbers around, here’s a couple for you:
50% of Palestinians support a return to armed intifada, and 48% support dissolving the PA.
https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/866
I would never describe the Palestinians as a “violent group” based on this, but the Israelis don’t have the luxury of ignoring threats to their lives and the lives of their children. Unlike you and Beinart.
"I never said the Palestinians are a violent group". Fine. Then you're happy for Israel to become a democracy with equal rights for all Palestinian people?
Given the overwhelming tide of repressive, murderous violence being enacted by the IDF against the Palestinian people, it is no surprise that they want to rise up against it. Why wouldn't they? It's entirely legitimate, unlike the US-supplied and -funded destruction of Palestinian people and property. The threats to life are generally in the direction of those people, not to Israelis. The statistics I supplied you show that as clear as day.
As for the PA, it needs to be dissolved. It's always been a stooge of the Israeli state. "Since the 1990s, the Oslo Accords — which established the PA as a subcontractor for the occupation — have tried to turn the Palestinian cause into an administrative matter rather than a struggle for freedom. The PA led us to believe that the maximum we should aim to achieve in our lives is an Israeli-issued permit, or a successful coordination for medical treatment in an Israeli hospital. This is a passive approach that pretends that our problem is merely with daily logistical issues, and that by just solving these matters, Palestinians will be satisfied.
The recent uprising has shown how much the PA’s approach is out of touch with its people. In fact, the PA is perhaps the only Palestinian institution left that seriously believes that a two-state solution can be fulfilled, or that the Oslo Accords can provide a path toward any kind of liberation."
https://www.972mag.com/palestinian-authority-protests-vaccines-oslo/
So first you say there is no security threat, now you’re saying there is violence but it’s all justified and legitimate. Maybe you should figure out what you actually believe beyond just “Israel bad.”
An uprising against a repressive government is indeed a security threat to that state. However, even you would admit that such an uprising is morally justifiable. Would you deny that, say, the uprising by Jews in 73-74 CE against the repressive Roman state at Masada should be condemned because it posed a security threat to the Roman empire?
Good, we agree that there is a security threat. You think it’s a justified threat, I think it’s not. There’s nothing more to discuss. Thank you for your contributions.
I like where you’re going with the idea of how such a magnanimous gesture of reparations, rooted in Torah, could inspire a paradigm shift in relations and reconciliation. However, what is missing here is the culpability of other Arab state actors in this. These reparations are not the responsibility of Israel alone. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria should be part of the offering plan. Furthermore, I think your frame is a bit anachronistic in that your looking at things from a 2021 perspective, where a chasm of power and societal development has grown quite wide since 1947. We must not forget the balance of power between the warring parties in 1947. Your presentation makes the Palestinians absolutely acted upon, as subjugated entirely against their will. That stripping of their agency in the roots of the conflict helps no one to better appreciate the complexity.
I don't read Moses' directive in Deuteronomy as requiring "reparations." Slavery and other forms of servitude were an accepted part of ancient societies. Instead, the directive is more likely to simply mean that releasing a slave without providing some way for them to survive would be cruel and inhumane, in some ways worse than remaining a slave, since the master had some obligation to provide at least subsistence. This is similar to efforts to provide transition and support to convicts after they are released from prison. Reparations are something else, and would be relevant in the case of people who were wrongly imprisoned.
Typo to correct for posterity: "The Israelites were saying the Egyptians from being hated" saying s/be saving
"Israel believes “the influx of millions of Palestinians into Israel would pose a threat to its national security.”" No doubt that is true from the perspective of a Zionist who wants Israel to remain as it is: an undemocratic, apartheid, ethno-nationalist state which privileges white Jewish people well above any other. The question is, of course, whether that is a valid state for any nation to defend.
- "It worries me a great deal. The question of what is going to be the fate of the Jews [in a one state solution] is very difficult for me. I really don't know." -Edward Said
- “If the refugees were to return…you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” –Omar Barghouti quoting Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al Quds University.
- "In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly - the intention is the extermination of Israel." - Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister, October 11, 1949
- "If the refugees return to Israel - Israel will cease to exist." - Gamal Abdel Nasser, 1961
- "The day on which the Arab hope for the return of the refugees to Palestine is realized will be the day of Israel's extermination." - Abdallah al-Yafi, Lebanese Prime Minister
I suppose you expect us to believe Omar Barghouti and Gamal Nasser are Zionists now?
Indeed. Israel as it is today - racist, apartheid, capitalist, ethno-nationalist, privileging white Jewish people - and as it was from the 1948 Nakba has no moral right to exist. Why should it? Many Jewish people don't want that to exist either. Far-right anti-Semites, many of whom the Israeli state has been courting over the last few years, love the idea of a single place for Jews to live in, segregated from non-Jews. That gives the anti-Semites a great reason to expel Jewish people.
As for Edward Said:
"As Edward Said puts it, Oslo “set the stage for separation,” yet permanent peace can happen only with a binational Israeli-Palestinian state... Edward Said described the claim that Palestine is “principally and exclusively” Arab as a nationalistic myth and a radical simplification of “a land of many histories”. This is not to feed the Zionist myth either, but it is to acknowledge the rich multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious nature of Palestine which is perpetually threatened by Zionist hegemony.
... the problem is that Palestinian self-determination in a separate state is unworkable, just as unworkable as the principle of separation between a demographically mixed, irreversibly connected Arab population without sovereignty and a Jewish population with it. The question, I believe, is not how to devise means for persisting in trying to separate them but to see whether it is possible for them to live together as fairly and peacefully as possible… There can be no reconciliation unless both peoples, two communities of suffering, resolve that their existence is a secular fact, and that it has to be dealt with as such.
This does not mean a diminishing of Jewish life as Jewish life or a surrendering of Palestinian Arab aspirations and political existence. On the contrary, it means self-determination for both peoples. But it does mean being willing to soften, lessen and finally give up special status for one people at the expense of the other."
https://www.vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=4553
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/memory-edward-said-one-state-solution
Is the idea of Jewish people living in equality and harmony with others - specifically Palestinian Arab people - so revolting to you that you cannot even consider the notion?
Once again you are unable to respond to my argument that the Palestinian refugees do in fact pose a security concern to the Israelis, and it isn’t just Zionists who say so. Thank you for being honest and admitting that you don’t want a Jewish state to exist and that you see the refugees as a tool to accomplish that task. I wish Beinart could be just as honest as you.
And if a few million Israelis (or as you would describe them, “racist, apartheid, capitalist, ethno-nationalist, privileging white Jewish people”) get killed in the process, that’s not a bug, that’s a feature. After all, they’re just Jews, right?
"Palestinian refugees do in fact pose a security concern to the Israelis" based on no evidence apart from the obvious fact that the apartheid, ethno-religious state will eventually have to give way and become a normal democracy. You clearly believe that, given the slightest weakness on the part of the Zionist state, the Palestinian people would kill every Jew in sight. Yet strangely, the evidence is utterly in the opposite direction. The facts of the numbers killed and injured show clearly that Israel is a violent, repressive state against Palestinians.
There are plenty of Jewish people who, like me, do not want Israel to stay a non-democracy, a segregated ghetto for Jews, allied to far-right anti-Semites and to theocracies such as Saudi Arabia. If you regard that as a satisfactory status quo, it's no wonder that millions of people around the world are actively campaigning to destroy it.
Evidence has been provided to you already. If you choose not to look at it, or to listen to the words of Palestinians and other Arab leaders, that is your problem, not mine. You are three for three on misrepresenting my arguments, I never said or believe that “the Palestinian people would kill every Jew in sight.” Lying like that only shows the weakness in your point of view, not strength.
As I said, if you choose to ignore the decades of terrorism carried out by Palestinians against the Israelis, you and Beinart have that privilege. But the Israelis don’t, and calling them names isn’t going to change their minds either.
Since you seem so certain that a one state will result in equal rights for everyone, perhaps you can provide evidence that the Palestinian government treats its people with equal rights at this moment, including women, non-Muslims, LGBT people, and dissenters? While you’re at it, maybe you can address the polls that show vast majorities of Palestinians want sharia law and don’t want equal rights in their state.
Given your claim that, to make Israel a democracy would entail "a few million Israelis ... getting killed" by Palestinian people, certainly that means you think that the Palestinians are inherently more violent than the allegedly peaceable Zionists. Once again, I point you to the figures I supplied you with earlier.
As for your allegations about Palestinian oppression of their own people, it is as inexcusable as Israeli oppression, apartheid, racism and other forms of discrimination which you didn't even try to deny. Both sides have plenty of darkness.
"Is the idea of Jewish people living in equality and harmony with others - specifically Palestinian Arab people - so revolting to you that you cannot even consider the notion?"
James, there are literally dozens of nation-states that exist in the world today. They are all "ethno nationalist" and "privilege" their nation over others.
To strip the Jewish people and only the Jewish people of their state would deny them numerous rights such as a voice and vote at the UN. Stripping the Jewish people of their state would make them UNEQUAL to dozens of other nations such as the Germans, Japanese, Syrians, Turks, Greeks, Poles, Armenians, Hungarians, etc. etc. etc. So maybe you should answer your own question. Why don't you want the Jewish people to be equal to all of these other nations?
Ah... the standard response: Israel may treat Palestinians appallingly, but other nations treat people worse. Well, at least you're honest about the apartheid now. No nation apart from Israel is openly and constitutionally for one ethnic group. The last one was South Africa, with which apartheid Israel was a close ally, even to the point of offering it nuclear weapons. Jewish people would still be living in Israel if they wanted to; only they would not have legal superiority over anyone else. The armed forces would protect everyone, not just Jewish people.
All citizens would have equal civil and human rights. If you think that is a threat against Jews, the rest of the world disagrees.
James, you've made it clear that your problem is with Israel's existence as a Jewish state, so let's not bring in non sequiturs like its treatment of Palestinians and the rights of its citizens. Even if every Palestinian on Earth was living happily and content, you'd still want Israel destroyed.
"No nation apart from Israel is openly and constitutionally for one ethnic group."
This is so incredibly untrue it's amazing you even typed it out. I could link you to over a dozen constitutions of various nation states that explicitly state they are for one ethnic group. I'll give you one to start, and if you continue to push this lie, I'll give you some more.
Constitution of Palestine: "Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation. Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve..... Islam is the official religion in Palestine...The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a principal source of legislation".
Please, James, can you answer my question? Would stripping the Jewish people of their representation and vote at the UN make them EQUAL or UNEQUAL to the dozens of other nations represented at the UN? It's a simple question, so why can't you give me a simple answer?
“ Zionist who wants Israel to remain as it is: an undemocratic, apartheid, ethno-nationalist state which privileges white Jewish people well above any other.” This statement is not factually correct. If it was, there wouldn’t be “non-white, non-Jewish” citizens of Israel able to express themselves. But in fact, parliament has a diversity of representative voices, including non-Jewish ministers. Similarly, many institutions in the country include non-white and non-Jews at the highest levels.
Your statement is regurgitated bluster that isn’t rooted in the facts on the ground, but rather in rhetoric and blind hatred for Zionism.
I was referring to the actual status of people living in apartheid Israel who don't have the privileged status of being white and Jewish. It isn't even good enough to be Jewish. For example: "Since arriving in Israel, many Ethiopian Jews have faced constant discrimination. Their faith was questioned by rabbis and their communities ostracized from the rest of Israeli society. In 1990, the National Israeli Blood Bank routinely destroyed blood donated by Ethiopian Israelis because they were “afraid that the Ethiopians carried HIV.” There was a cap on the number of Ethiopian Jews entering Israel until relatively recently.
The minority status of the Ethiopian Jewish community creates poor material conditions. They have the highest poverty rate among the Jewish population in Israel, and face the highest levels of police violence after Palestinians. Israel calls itself a bastion of human rights and progress, while denying rights to both Palestinians and Ethiopian Jews. The treatment of Ethiopian Jews is completely different from the warm welcome offered to Jewish people from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, for instance."
https://www.liberationnews.org/israels-long-history-of-anti-black-racism/
As for the so-called diversity in apartheid Israel:
"New Basic Law approved by a Knesset vote of 62-55 has distinct apartheid characteristics and requires racist acts as a constitutional value.
The Israeli Knesset voted 62 to 55 early today, Thursday, 19 July 2018, to approve the Jewish Nation-State Basic Law that constitutionally enshrines the identity of the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
This law guarantees the ethnic-religious character of Israel as exclusively Jewish and entrenches the privileges enjoyed by Jewish citizens, while simultaneously anchoring discrimination against Palestinian citizens and legitimizing exclusion, racism, and systemic inequality. The Jewish Nation-State Basic Law is the “law of laws” capable of overriding any ordinary legislation."
https://www.adalah.org/en/content/view/9565