You may or may not understand why this July 1, 2008 article caught my eye. I am the Diaspora and I have an opinion. That very fact makes me an outsider. For instance, I don’t believe that Israel should have had mass aliyah from Russia, for Jews and non-Jews alike, just so that they could beef up their white majority. Yes, non-Jews from Russia are parading as Jews in Israel today. What do the Jewish Israelis have to say about that?
Though 3/4 of Jewish Israelis feel that Diaspora Jews should butt out, 40% of them say that funding of political campaigns in Israel should continue to be financed by Diaspora Jews. Ah, the money factor. Olmert must have been attentive, as he had his very own American sugar daddy give him massive play money. I, the Diaspora, believe this is corrupt. Apparently, Israel is agreeing with me on this one, as Olmert is stepping down (this offense probably being the least of his transgressions).
Well apparently, Mr. Olmert also had some ideas about the MO of the current diaspora relations: instead of encouraging aliyah, he wants to reach out to Jews in Jewish communities of the world, teach them Hebrew, teach them about Jewish heritage (now what heritage would this be? is it going to include the history and contribution of Jews from North African countries, or are we just going to pick up the story in Western Europe?)
If anything, I have learned more about the non-Sephardic Jewish history by picking up a book called “The Seventh Million” by historian Tom Segev. Now that I have both sides of the whole story, I don’t think I want Israel telling me the political Zionist version of events. It is also disconcerting to learn that when Olmert makes these sweeping decisions, there are no Diaspora leaders present.
Now here comes an eye opener:
At the same time, a vast majority of Israeli Jews – 76.4% - said that in their opinion it is safer to live as a Jew in Israel than in the Diaspora, with only 10.4% choosing the Diaspora as being safer (13.2% did not know or refused to answer.)
Is the situation in Israel so insular as to return these kinds of numbers in a poll regarding safety? Which areas of the diaspora would Israelis feel are less safe? If we look at the map, the U.S. followed by France, have the largest number of Jews outside of Israel (in that order). While no Jews have even been murdered in the U.S there have been plenty of anti-semitic attacks on synagogues, cemeteries, and other public venues which harbor Jews. France has been less fortunate in that part of the discourse in there includes almost 6 million Muslims which are not fully assimilated and therefore find Jews to be easy prey.
Perhaps Israelis interpret safety as something other than protection from terrorist attacks. Though we do not have quantifiable data as to whom was polled, their ages, demographics, etc.., my reading the commentaries on Ha’aretz and other Israeli newspapers turned up some interesting interpretations:
1) a mother explains safety as the feeling that the Jewish experience in Israel is safer from “inter-marriage”, and that it is the only place where she can be “the majority”.
2) another reader explains that illusion of safety as partly euphoric, and being endemic to living in Israel.
3) some talk about “theft and murder” as extremely rare occurrences in Israel, in their specific neighborhoods. I am assuming here that the writer is thinking of petty theft, and murder as a non-terrorist act.
One of the tongue-in-cheek responses to the above stated opinions was that the 76% who responded had actually left Israel. I can therefore conclude, based on this small sampling, that Israelis that were polled might have expressed a certain degree of comfort being in a homeland where they were not viewed as a minority and did not really address the question of safety in the manner in which it was posed.
“We must understand that it is possible that the period of massive immigration to Israel is nearing an end,” he said. Olmert said the new goal should be to focus on stemming the tide of assimilation abroad.”
This quote was taken from a July 10th article which appeared in the 5Towns Jewish Times (an American publication). Nefesh B’Nefesh, a North American Aliyah Organization, has apparently been more successful in delivering immigrants to Israel, than Israel’s own Jewish Agency for Israel. Since its inception in 2002, they increased Israel’s population by 14,000 and are targeting a figure of 100,000 “in the coming years”.
And finally, perhaps the only statement that I agree with that has come out of Olmert’s mouth: Israel must be the one to fight anti-semitism. I could not agree more, and for several reasons.
The recent rise in world violence against Jews is mostly a result of Israel’s policy with its Arab neighbors. I am not going to single out the Palestinians, because that is too obvious and the largest thorn in the Jewish World’s side. But we’ve also got Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, - well the list could be long.
This is just as obvious to me now, as it was when the Jews from North African nations were exiled as the state of Israel was formed. Action/reaction. And it is not inferred here that the state of Israel should not exist, far from it. We are just looking at the consequences of the actions of the war of 1948. Arab nationalistic pride became strengthened and they proverbially rose up in unison, and said : out with the Zionists, even though the majority of the Jews from North Africa were Sephardic with no political views of expansion.
Israel has just celebrated its 60th year as a nation. But the celebration is dampened by its continued aggression against the Palestinians, 750,000 of which were forcibly displaced from their homes,-that number has grown into 3 million and the entire world is watching. Despite repeated requests from the European Union, the USA, Desmond Tutu, and others for Israel to halt its settlement expansion, it continues to defiantly build on occupied territory. This is the cause for anti-semitism. Any time you hear of a Jew being attacked “anywhere” in the world, this is what the attacker is thinking. I have spoken with enough Muslims to say there is no getting around it. You will not see an abatement in acts of anti-semitism until such time as peace comes to the Middle East, and Israel tones down its aggression.
I am Jewish, proud of it, and call things as they are. I am brainwash safe. And one of my dearest wish is to visit Israel one day. And I do mean, visit.
- Tags: antisemitism, diaspora, Israel, sephardic Jews
3 Responses to “Israel and the Diaspora”
Leave a reply
The Coffee Calendar 2009 by Ricardo Levins Morales Onsale Now:
blog advertising is good for you
Top Stories
Powered By Ringsurf
The Girl Detective
August 24th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
“Despite repeated requests from the European Union, the USA, Desmond Tutu, and others for Israel to halt its settlement expansion, it continues to defiantly build on occupied territory. This is the cause for anti-semitism.”
I don’t think the world saw any reduction in anti-Semitism in the three years between the end of WWII and the inception of Israel. Rather, Israel/Arab relations is just the current locus of anti-Jewish sentiment. If Israel dismantled its settlements and reversed its foreign policy tomorrow, anti-Semitism would only find a new set of issues, real and imagined, to focus on. Israel’s crime against the Diaspora and its own citizens isn’t creating anti-Semitism, but rather making it too easy.
With that nitpick aside, though, great post.
Matt
August 25th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
That’s no nitpick, TGD. It’s never right to blame victims.
And the post forgets the Seattle shooting. (”While no Jews have even been murdered in the U.S”) And the fact that most hate crimes go unreported. One case I didn’t hear about until years later was the arson that destroyed a small Holocaust memorial museum in Indiana. Not that long ago, I did hear about an apartment off campus at Brown University that was firebombed. I think it’s unlikely Seattle was the only antisemitic murder in the US.
And the post forgets the importance of agency as a response to antisemitism. It doesn’t necessarily make it “safer” but the ways in which American society can shut down responses to antisemitism makes it feel unsafe. That’s not peculiar to antisemitism, but about humans handle threats on a basic, psychological level.
Besides, perhaps being completely free to respond to antisemitism will make things much less safe. A recent case in Britain had a Jewish radio station shut down because they implied that someone is an antisemite. Someone who is indeed an antisemite. Using libel laws, he basically made it impossible to confront antisemitism. That sort of thing would certainly make me feel unsafe, and though nowhere near that level, I’ve seen the same type of discourse in the US.
On the other hand, perhaps some Israeli views about safety there are partly psychological defenses to trauma. In that case, I would think a different type of response - gentler and understanding - might be more warranted.
Btw, the statement on France bothers me. “France has been less fortunate in that part of the discourse in there includes almost 6 million Muslims which are not fully assimilated and therefore find Jews to be easy prey.” It comes across as entirely natural, even essentialized it seems, that Muslims would be antisemitic. More, denying Muslims agency seems to be a way of evading a response to antisemitism. Again with, “Arab nationalistic pride became strengthened and they proverbially rose up in unison, and said : out with the Zionists.” Couldn’t that be criticized? That Jews seeking a solution to antisemitism (even a flawed solution) would provoke the ethnic cleansing of Jews is certainly no law of physics. Perhaps it was the nature of Jewish oppression that any progress would provoke a backlash, as people who seek to end oppression seem to always find to be the case?
daniel
September 9th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
now, as a proud diasporist, i actually find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with the israeli majority here on most points. there is no reason why i, here in the largest jewish city in the world (new york), should have any more say in the affairs of a small racial/theocratic state in the eastern mediterranean - say, israel - than in those of a large ethno/military state in the eastern sahel - say, sudan. the israeli state, under pretty much any circumstances than the actually existing ones, would have the same relation to my life as any other state in which i do not live. i’d like nothing more than to wake up and find myself in a world where that’d be possible.
if only the israeli state, and the zionist movement whose offspring it is, would let things work that way. but they insist on speaking in the name of all jews everywhere, and claiming they act in our interest. the latter is blatantly untrue, and the former is simply obnoxious, not to mention false, undemocratic and patronizing. both, however, are pretty much inevitable results of one of the core principles of zionism - shlilat hagalut/’negation of the diaspora’, which today takes the form of claims that the diasporic jewish majority is dependent on, or must define itself in relation to, or should have a primary relationship to the israeli state.
until we dismantle this zionist insistence on subordinating the lives most jews actually live to the myth of a Jüdische Heimat, there’s no way for the majority of jews to have genuine relationships which make sense with the jewish communities of the eastern mediterranean. as long as those communities are mythologized as something other than part of the worldwide jewish diaspora, their cultures and societies will remain nearly incomprehensible to us, and their rulers will remain terribly dangerous to them, to us, and to all those surrounding them.