Does Israel Have Right To Exist?

[Communist]

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/does-israel-really-have-a-right-to-exist/

Does Israel Really Have a Right to Exist?

by Susan Abulhawa / June 15th, 2009

Following Netanyahu’s much anticipated policy speech, politicians and journalists, like mindless automatons, have set about repeating Israel’s tired mantra that Palestinians should recognize Israel’s right to exist. Never mind the fact that the PLO and Palestine Authority have obliged this ludicrous call, not once, but four times. And never mind that Israel has always denied Palestine’s right to exist, not only as a nation, but as individuals seeking a dignified life in our own homeland.

Does anyone find it interesting that Israel is the only country on the planet going around with this incessant insistence that everyone recognize her right to exist? Given that we Palestinians are the ones who have been dispossessed, occupied, and oppressed, one might expect that we should be the ones making such a demand. But t hat isn’t the case.

Why? Because our right to exist as a nation is self-evident. We are the natives of that land! We know we have that right. The world knows it. That’s why Palestine doesn’t need Israel or any other country to recognize her right to exist. We are the rightful heirs to that land and this can be verified legally, historically, culturally, and even genetically. And as such, the only true legitimacy Israel will ever have must come from us abdicating our inheritance, our history, and our culture to Israel. That’s why Israel insists we declare she had a right to take everything we ever had – from home and property, cemeteries, churches and mosques, to culture and history and hope.

Israel is a country that was founded by Europeans who came to Palestine, formed terrorist gangs who set about a systematic ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinians from their homes on 78% of Historic Palestine in 1948. Those Palestinians and their descendants still languish in refugee camps. Israel attempted a similar scenario in 1967 when they conquered the remainder of Palestine, but Palestinians then couldn’t be dislodged from their homes as easily.

This remains true, despite 40 years of Israel’s violent and oppressive military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Despite home demolitions, land confiscations, rapacious building of Jewish-only colonies, endless checkpoints, targeted assassinations, bombings of schools, hospitals, municipal buildings and malls, closures and denials; despite the massive human rights abuses, the imprisonment and torture of men women and children alike, the separation of families, the daily humiliations; despite the massive killings – Palestinians remain. We still resist. We still live, love, and have babies. As much as we can, we rebuild what Israel destroys. Such are rights!

Rights are inherent and inherently just, like the right to live with dignity and to be masters of one’s own fate. It is a human right not be persecuted and oppressed because you happen to belong to one religion and not another.

That Israelis simply take property belonging to Palestinians is not a right. That is theft. That Israel cut off the movement of food, medicine and other basic goods to the Gaza strip, causing massive malnutrition, economic collapse and misery because Palestinians elected particular leaders is not a right. That is an affront to humanity. That Israel rain death from the skies on an already battered and starved Gaza, murdering over 3000 human beings and maiming thousands more in a single month is not a right. It’s a war crime. That Israel has employed every imperialistic tactic to subjugate, humiliate, break, and expel an entire nation of principally unarmed civilians because of their religion is not a right. It is a moral obscenity. That every Jew from Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Australia be entitled to dual citizenship, one in their native country and one in Israel, while the rightful heirs to the land linger as refugees without citizenship anywhere is not a right. It is an outrage.

I’m sure my words will be twisted in some way to imply that I’m advocating pushing Israelis “into the sea” or some other asinine claim. So let me be explicit: We all have the right to exist, to live, to be masters of our own destiny. We all have the right not to be oppressed by others. Such rights are inherent to every individual living in that land: Jew, Muslim, or Christian. But Israelis do not have the right to create particular religious demographics by causing the demise of the natives. To be a Jewish [or Muslim or Christian] state, where privilege is accorded to those belonging to a particular religion at the expense of those who do not is not a right.

A nation that discriminates against and oppresses those who do not belong to a particular religious, racial, or ethnic group is not a light onto nations. It is a blight. And to recognize such racism as a human or national right goes against every tenet of international law. It defies the basic sense that the worth of a human being should not be measured by their religion, any more than it should be measured by the color of their skin or the language they speak.

_______________________________________________
This is the activist announcement list.

[Qayin]

We all have the right not to be oppressed by others. Such rights are inherent to every individual living in that land: Jew, Muslim, or Christian. But Israelis do not have the right to create particular religious demographics by causing the demise of the natives. To be a Jewish [or Muslim or Christian] state, where privilege is accorded to those belonging to a particular religion at the expense of those who do not is not a right.

Couldnt have said it any better.
;)

[RedMonty]

I think asking if Israel has a right to exist is a bit of a pointless question. The atrocities of the Israeli government are horrific, but the practical question today is how to secure justice for the Palestinian people whilst accepting that Israel is there to stay and finding some sort of compromise.

In this respect the PLO and Hamas have actually made huge concessions. As mentioned in the original post, they have (despite what is claimed by Israel) accepted Israel's right to exist and have even accepted Palestinian borders as they were following the 1967 war. This apparently is not enough for Israel, who continue with their illegal settlements encroaching into Palestinian land, bulldozing people's homes, destroying their farms and cutting them off from large sections of their communities (including schools and hospitals) with the construction of the (also illegal) arpartheid wall.

[FreeFocus]

I think asking if Israel has a right to exist is a bit of a pointless question. The atrocities of the Israeli government are horrific, but the practical question today is how to secure justice for the Palestinian people whilst accepting that Israel is there to stay and finding some sort of compromise.

I disagree. If you're looking at it from a perspective of practicality, Palestinians will soon comprise a majority in historic Palestine, and so-called "Arab Israelis" will comprise a majority of Israelis within the next few decades.

It is utterly unacceptable for settler states to exist, much less be "accepted."

[RedMonty]

It is utterly unacceptable for settler states to exist, much less be "accepted."

What do you suggest then?

[PeaderO'Donnell]

What do you suggest then?


Ever hear of French Algeria?

[RedMonty]

Ever hear of French Algeria?

I'm not familiar with what went on there I'm afraid.

But I do think that utterly rejecting Israel's right to exist is counter-productive and will acheive absolutely nothing with regard to securing peace in the region or any kind of justice for the Palestinian people.

[AvanteRedGarde]

no

[PeaderO'Donnell]

I'm not familiar with what went on there I'm afraid.

But I do think that utterly rejecting Israel's right to exist is counter-productive and will acheive absolutely nothing with regard to securing peace in the region or any kind of justice for the Palestinian people.

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

There can be no peace in the region while the settler state remains.

An Israeli Trotskyite group has put forward what seems to me a just solution. They have a poster here. Hopefully he can explain to you why the zionist state must be destoried.

[Il Medico]

Israel can exist (until the revolution that is) as long as they do not oppress non Jews.

[Psy]

I'm not familiar with what went on there I'm afraid.

But I do think that utterly rejecting Israel's right to exist is counter-productive and will acheive absolutely nothing with regard to securing peace in the region or any kind of justice for the Palestinian people.
But why do satellite states of large imperial powers have a right to exist? Epically satellite states that have displaced the native population? Israel does not exist as a independent nation, it currently is nothing more the a satellite of the USA, the Israeli ruling class is the US ruling classes ***** thus saying the state of Israel has a right to exist currently means that the Israel has no right to independence and must remain part of the US empire as currently that is all the state of Israel has to offer.

[PeaderO'Donnell]

Israel can exist (until the revolution that is) as long as they do not oppress non Jews.

Are you the guy who wants to legalise drugs?

[gorillafuck]

Are you the guy who wants to legalise drugs?
I also very much disagree with what he said but don't bring other completely unrelated threads into this discussion.

[9]

No. But then again, does the United States have a right to exist?

[Revy]

Why should any state have the right to exist?

No, Israel does not have a "right to exist". This by the way is their reasoning for their "right to exist":



We were granted our right to exist by the God of our fathers at the glimmer of the dawn of human civilization four thousand years ago. Hence, the Jewish people have an historic, eternal and inalienable right to exist in this land, Eretz Israel, the land of our forefathers.

^ pretty much shows why Israel is not seriously interested in peace, they are driven by religious fanaticism. ^

[Revy]

No. But then again, does the United States have a right to exist?

That's the point I'm getting at here.

Nationalism as a popular ideology will not survive the world revolution. There will undoubtedly be remnants of it, but none powerful enough to block integration into the world socialist federation.

This is what we have, today, nations proclaiming their "right to exist" yet bombing and slaughtering people in the name of such. Who is more worthy of life, human beings or the nation? The nation does not breathe, it does not bleed, it does not do anything of substance. It is made by those who uphold it in cult-like fervor.

[swampfox]

Israel has the right to exist as much as Palestine does. The Arabs were there before 1945. If you don't believe in the Biblical shit, then the Jews weren't there.

[Il Medico]

Are you the guy who wants to legalise drugs?
I posted a thread on it. And yes, drugs should be legal. However, I don't see how this applies. No nations should exist in my opinion. However, the elimination of nation states won't happen until after the revolution. The revolution will overthrow all states. It can exist like any other nation, should it exist? No.


EDIT:

I also very much disagree with what he said but don't bring other completely unrelated threads into this discussion.
Thank you on the second part. For the rest, see above.

[9]

Israel has the right to exist as much as Palestine does. The Arabs were there before 1945. If you don't believe in the Biblical shit, then the Jews weren't there.

The Jews were there - there are archeological remnants which contain ancient Hebrew writing, among other things. It is historically accepted that "the Jews" were there. The question, however, is whether the Jews of today are the blood descendants of the Jews of biblical times. And genetic evidence would indicate that modern-day Palestinians and Muslims in neighboring countries are actually the true blood descendants of the biblical Israelites. Even many Ashkenazic Jews in "Israel" accept this, but conveniently put it aside as irrelevant.

[Psy]

Israel has the right to exist as much as Palestine does. The Arabs were there before 1945. If you don't believe in the Biblical shit, then the Jews weren't there.
First you have to ask what is Israel. It is a client capitalist nation state, meaning it is a body that represents the interests a ruling class that itself represents the interests of a even larger ruling class.

Saying Isreal has a right to exist makes as much sense as saying Vichy France had a right to exist. The state of Isreal doesn't represent the workers of Isreal any more then Vichy France repersented the workers of France and Isreal is just as reactionary as Vichy France was.

[EqualityandFreedom]

No nation has a right a right to exist be it 60 years old or 6000 years old.

[FreeFocus]

Please draw a distinction between states and nations. They are not synonymous, and I've been thinking lately that conflating the two has to do with cultural circumstances in Europe (the birthplace of the modern-day state), as socialism has been heavily influenced by European thinkers. States are unacceptable, obviously. However, nations are groupings of people with a common heritage and culture. There is no need to target cultural identities, although we should always pursue a progressive agenda in eliminating negative elements in all cultures that prevent genuine progress.

[Yehuda Stern]

the practical question today is how to secure justice for the Palestinian people whilst accepting that Israel is there to stay and finding some sort of compromise.

Giving in to imperialism in the name of practicality is the standard practice of imperialism. Do you also want to accept that the imperialist USA is here to stay? If you accept the reactionary forces of the world in this way, in what way are you a revolutionary?


Why should any state have the right to exist?

I agree and disagree. Agree, because obviously we don't want any capitalist state to exist. Also, I would argue that true Leninists would never defend the right of self-determination of any oppressor nation - only of oppressed nation. However, I disagree somewhat, because with Israel it's different - it's a colonialist settler state, not a 'usual' state, and as such is a particular evil because it doesn't just oppress and murder the peoples of the region, it also prevents the development of the class struggle within its borders - but more on that later.


Israel has the right to exist as much as Palestine does.

Explain in what way an oppressor colonialist state has as much right to exist as an oppressed state, leaving aside the fact that there isn't a real Palestine right now as Israel occupies most of it and has a siege put on the rest.


An Israeli Trotskyite group has put forward what seems to me a just solution. They have a poster here. Hopefully he can explain to you why the zionist state must be destoried.I'm assuming you're talking to me (unless there's a new poster from Israel I don't know about). I will be brief because I don't have much time now. If needed, I'll expand on the ideas I post here later.

1. The Zionist state was created to serve as a tool in the hands of the imperialists to smash the Arab uprisings and secure their interests. This always the idea of Zionism, contrary to the claims of some people that Zionist had a socialist past. Theodor Herzl, the reactionary monarchist who founded the movement and to whose ideas all Zionists subscribe, wrote that the Zionist state will be "a stronghold of civilization against Asiatic barbarism."

Upon it's foundation, the Zionist state murdered, displaced and deported nearly one million Palestinians. Since then, it's foundation cost the lives of many other Lebanese, Palestinians and others who stood in the way of its goals - never mind the many common Israeli Jews who served as its cannon fodder.

2. Normally this would entail the creation of a revolutionary party of Israeli workers who would collaborate with their Palestinian class brothers and sisters in overthrowing Zionist imperialism.

However, the settler state has created a situation in which Jewish workers have significant privileges in relation to Palestinian workers, inside and outside Israel (and as a side note - a situation in which Israeli Palestinians have significant privileges in relation to Palestinians outside the 'green line).

Therefore, most Israeli workers have been relatively unaffected by the radicalization of the world working class at any point in the history of the state, showing that their privileges go beyond the normal white skin privilege of workers in imperialist states.

3. The conclusion, then, is that a Palestinian vanguard party must be created to fight against Zionist imperialism and for the socialist revolution, as part of the refoundation of the FI (I'm jumping a bit here - but I can write more on the FI thing later, and probably in a different thread).

This party can, and should make an effort, to include as many Jewish workers as possible and win at least the neutral sympathy of the rest. In the revolutionary workers state which this party will create, Jews will be able to live without facing oppression or discrimination, as long as they do not revolt against its existence. However, this state will be Palestinian in nature, and its territory will extend over all of historic Palestine (i.e., from the Jordan river to the sea).

[GPDP]

I figure this is as good a time as any to ask this question.

Ok, so the idea is that the Palestinians must start a revolution, and destroy Israel. So far, so good. But what about the rest of the ME? What about US-backed imperialist counter-revolution? Does the idea also carry forward into calling for the expansion of the Palestinian revolution into the rest of the ME? Beyond, even?

Basically, it looks to me like the plight of the Palestinians will only be resolved once and for all as a result of a world-wide revolution, or at least a revolution that expands into the entire ME and into the rest of Asia as well.

[Revy]

I agree. I do make a distinction between nations.

Israel - a colonial settler state - is fundamentally different compared to Palestine - an oppressed nation. But when I say that no state has the right to exist, it's because this is essentially a made-up right, that is really specific to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and is used in support of Israel.

It is progressive that the Palestinians win their struggle, but not because of the freedom of the "Palestinian nation", but the Palestinian people. Their national movement arises because they are oppressed, it is the way they express their reaction to their oppression, therefore, socialists should support that movement and move it in a socialist, revolutionary and class -oriented direction.

What does it mean to be Palestinian? I think the identity itself can apply to Jews. Rather than feel alienated by it, they can embrace it. In fact, this does not originally refer to Arabs only. Right now in Israel there is a very divisive atmosphere even against Israeli Arabs, so-called "loyalty laws" , and also they want to make it a crime if you deny that Israel should be a "Jewish state". How many political prisoners are they going to throw in jail? I definitely see Israel's political fortitude eroding over the next few years, while it may be irrational to make predictions about the future, I do think Israel is entering its last years.

And it starts with revolutionary movements across borders. Building a party in both Israel and Palestine. Building the idea that Palestinians and Israelis are not "two peoples, two nations" but "two peoples in ONE nation". So long as debate is left to the Zionists, Israelis will not see any other way to approach the issue.

Agitate - Educate - Organize!

[swampfox]

The Jews were there - there are archeological remnants which contain ancient Hebrew writing, among other things. It is historically accepted that "the Jews" were there. The question, however, is whether the Jews of today are the blood descendants of the Jews of biblical times. And genetic evidence would indicate that modern-day Palestinians and Muslims in neighboring countries are actually the true blood descendants of the biblical Israelites. Even many Ashkenazic Jews in "Israel" accept this, but conveniently put it aside as irrelevant.

Not only this, but I don't understand why the Jews believe they are entitled to that land. Just because they inhabited it thousands of years ago as someone else above me said, doesn't mean they can just take from the Palestinians.

[the last donut of the night]

This is what we have, today, nations proclaiming their "right to exist" yet bombing and slaughtering people in the name of such. Who is more worthy of life, human beings or the nation? The nation does not breathe, it does not bleed, it does not do anything of substance. It is made by those who uphold it in cult-like fervor.

Amen, brother:)

[ComradeOm]

Ever hear of French Algeria?To where do you suggest deporting six million Jews then? That is after all the question that rejecting the existence of the Israeli nation inevitably raises. Specifically so now that you have mentioned the Pieds-Noirs and their fate

[9]

To where do you suggest deporting six million Jews then? That is after all the question that rejecting the existence of the Israeli nation inevitably raises. Specifically so now that you have mentioned the Pieds-Noirs and their fate

ComradeOm has pointed out the heart of the matter. It is quite easy to address the moral question of whether or not the State of Israel has the "right" to exist. Though it is a bit like raising the question of whether or not a racist sociopath has the "right" to exist.... it's beside the point. It is certainly my own opinion - and there seems to be a consensus here - that Israel cannot continue to exist in its present form. However, the reality is, as ComraseOm noted, that 5,314,000 Jews presently live in Israel/occupied-Palestine/call-it-what-you-will. And that is the essence of the question. Will they be made to return to Europe? And that is assuming that there are even countries that would be willing to accommodate such a massive influx of immigrants.
Personally, I think a single state comprising the entire territory of Israel and Palestine and their respective populations is the most practical solution, but the question of getting from here to there is extremely difficult to address.

[GPDP]

Why would the Jews have to go anywhere?

[Pawn Power]

Please draw a distinction between states and nations. They are not synonymous, and I've been thinking lately that conflating the two has to do with cultural circumstances in Europe (the birthplace of the modern-day state), as socialism has been heavily influenced by European thinkers. States are unacceptable, obviously. However, nations are groupings of people with a common heritage and culture. There is no need to target cultural identities, although we should always pursue a progressive agenda in eliminating negative elements in all cultures that prevent genuine progress.

While I agree with you distinction between nations and states I think you are mis-characterizing the 'nation.' The nation is also man made. That is, the state puts a lot of effort into forming the idea of a unified national identity. Sure there are often cultural and ethic norms within geographical locations. However, nations do not conform to them.

The state has much at stake for us to believe that we all have a common history and common interests and that it goes deeper than politics. However, the fact is that nations are largely arbitrary. And this is because they have been constructed to serve the interests of those in power and not organically. The whole ideal of a 'national identity' gives this away. A population has never been stagnant and is always interconnected to others.

I think that one book which talks about this in the larger context of Eurocentrism is Europe and a People Without History by Eric Wolf.

[RedMonty]

Workers ultimately have more in common with other workers (regardless of nationality) than they do with any member of the ruling class in their own country.

[Yehuda Stern]

Ok, so the idea is that the Palestinians must start a revolution, and destroy Israel. So far, so good. But what about the rest of the ME? What about US-backed imperialist counter-revolution? Does the idea also carry forward into calling for the expansion of the Palestinian revolution into the rest of the ME? Beyond, even?

Basically, it looks to me like the plight of the Palestinians will only be resolved once and for all as a result of a world-wide revolution

OK, these are all valid questions and your conclusion is basically correct. But couldn't we ask the same questions and reach the same conclusion about a revolution everywhere? That's exactly why Marxists support internationalism and permanent revolution.


Having dominating Arab powers in the region would have weakened the Israeli state considerably. If the Zionist state's purpose was to be the Imperialist hammer smashing Arab nationalism, what would happen when it was clear that Arab states could not be smashed? What else are you looking for, a Palestinian ghetto uprising that will just get suppressed and genocided?I'm looking for a workers revolution all over the middle east that will destroy all these reactionary regimes. But then, I'm a revolutionary Marxist.


To where do you suggest deporting six million Jews then? That is after all the question that rejecting the existence of the Israeli nation inevitably raises.

Nonsense. Jews who will be loyal to the revolution, or at least not rise militarily against it, could live as equals in a Palestinian state. The rest will have to go, but no one should feel sorry for them.

[( R )evolution]

The Jews were there - there are archeological remnants which contain ancient Hebrew writing, among other things. It is historically accepted that "the Jews" were there. The question, however, is whether the Jews of today are the blood descendants of the Jews of biblical times. And genetic evidence would indicate that modern-day Palestinians and Muslims in neighboring countries are actually the true blood descendants of the biblical Israelites. Even many Ashkenazic Jews in "Israel" accept this, but conveniently put it aside as irrelevant.

Who gives a shit if they were there 2000 years ago. Or if they were the blood descendants. The point of the matter is that the creation of the Israeli state was based upon racist Zionist ideals in which settlers came in and kicked out the native Palestinian population from there homes. No nation should ever be created by the forcible removal of the native inhabitants who have done nothing wrong. Fuck Israel

[ComradeOm]

Why would the Jews have to go anywhere?Because there is a finite amount of land in the Levant. If you want to give the 'natives' back their 'stolen' land in order to 'right' past injustices, as many in this thread would seemingly advocate, then its taken as a given that land transfers would occur. And if you move new people into a limited territory then you have to move others out. A single state solution* in which there was no such action taken would, in addition to not satisfying many Palestinian radicals, produce a state still de facto dominated by Israelis

In addition, PeaderO'Donnell specifically referred to French Algeria the 'solution' to which involved the flight and deportation of over a million French settlers. Unlike Israel of course they at least had a 'homeland' to return to

*I do understand the logic behind the 'It'll be alright after the revolution' attitude but still consider it something of a cop out. I'm not saying that you yourself are guilty of this GPDP but revolution isn't a magic wand that can be used to cure all ills


The rest will have to go, but no one should feel sorry for themWhere to?

And incidentally, this may well be my wishy-washy European sentiments coming to the fore, I don't like the idea of deporting a high percentage of any population for ethnic or religious reasons. If your post-revolution society cannot accommodate them then there is something serious wrong there


The point of the matter is that the creation of the Israeli state was based upon racist Zionist ideals in which settlers came in and kicked out the native Palestinian population from there homesThe point of the matter is that there are almost six million Jews living in Israel. They are not going anywhere and any proposed solution (be it one-state, two-state, no-state, whatever) is going to have to reconcile itself with that fact


No nation should ever be created by the forcible removal of the native inhabitants who have done nothing wrong. Fuck Israel I assume that you also support the deportation of a large majority of the US population (back to Europe perhaps) and the restoration of the Native American lands to pre-Columbus borders? You'd be surprised just how little 'shoulds' matter when it comes to history

[( R )evolution]

The point of the matter is that there are almost six million Jews living in Israel. They are not going anywhere and any proposed solution (be it one-state, two-state, no-state, whatever) is going to have to reconcile itself with that fact

Evidently but we are arguing about the creation of the state of Israel and whether or not it has a right to exist. Which it doesnt, but that is pointless because as you said there are 6 million jews living there. So we cant go back in time and reverse the Zionist migration of the Jews. But what we can do is destroy the state of Israel and create a state that doesnt discrminate by religion or race as Israel does now.

[REDSOX]

I believe Israel does not have the right to exist as a STATE. I believe in one state called palestine preferably a socialist palestine from the jordon to the sea where JEWS AND ARABS can live side by side as brothers and sisters if not comrades.

[Comrade B]

This article has helped my guide my arguments for the liberation of the Palestinian people very much, good post.
There is no argument for why Palestine should not exist, and with the existence of Israel, which has a weak case for its right to exist, Palestine cannot be.

[progressive_lefty]

I think Israel has to acknowledge its history, the longer it doesn't the longer it moves further and further to the right, and risks falling apart (even from with-in itself). Israel could have become a solid country, if it had stayed to its borders in 1967. No-one can understand the rationale for the settlements, which are evidence that right-wing Zionist ideology is still being implemented today. Israel can exist, if it chooses to except the peace plans put forward in resolutions passed by the UN, and the Arab peace initiative. Their rejection of the Arab peace initiative demonstrates their rejection of a Palestinian state, or any terms for communicating with the wider Arab world. In its current form, there is no legitimacy for the State of Israel, none..

[9]

Who gives a shit if they were there 2000 years ago. Or if they were the blood descendants. The point of the matter is that the creation of the Israeli state was based upon racist Zionist ideals in which settlers came in and kicked out the native Palestinian population from there homes. No nation should ever be created by the forcible removal of the native inhabitants who have done nothing wrong. Fuck Israel

It would have been helpful for you to have read the comment to which I was responding. I was correcting a historical error someone made, not making a case for Zionism.
"Who gives a shit if they were there 2000 years ago. Or if they were blood descendants."
Considering the biblical justification invoked by many Zionists, I wouldn't say its entirely irrelevant that the descendants of the biblical Jews (those to whom "God promised" the "land of Israel" in the Tanakh) are actually the very people presently being forced to live in a desperate state of subjugation under the boot of the Zionist regime.

[Yehuda Stern]

Where to?

I don't give a fuck. They are counterrevolutionaries and they can go to their big imperialist sponsors. By then, though, they'll realize they have no use for those nasty Jews anymore, and they'll remember how they crucified Jesus and control the economy, and words like kyke and hymie will start coming back. In that sense, the Zionists will have dug their own grave, by turning their back on the socialist revolution and being in league with the world's greatest anti-Semites.


And incidentally, this may well be my wishy-washy European sentiments coming to the fore, I don't like the idea of deporting a high percentage of any population for ethnic or religious reasons. If your post-revolution society cannot accommodate them then there is something serious wrong there

But that's not at all what I am suggesting. My criterion is fully political: if you support the revolution, or at least don't become part of the counterrevolution, you may live safely in the Palestinian workers' state without facing any discrimination or oppression, and we will make sure to accommodate your cultural needs. That is our commitment as revolutionary Marxists and internationalists. If you do join the counterrevolution, though, we will not show you any more mercy than the Bolsheviks showed the whites. That is also our commitment as revolutionary Marxists.

[ComradeOm]

Evidently but we are arguing about the creation of the state of Israel and whether or not it has a right to exist. Which it doesnt, but that is pointless because as you said there are 6 million jews living there. So we cant go back in time and reverse the Zionist migration of the Jews. But what we can do is destroy the state of Israel and create a state that doesnt discrminate by religion or race as Israel does now.Indeed the whole discussion is entirely academic. What Israel means by the 'right to exist' is merely recognition of this; ie that that its Jewish population are not going anywhere soon

And yes, we're all committed to the destruction of all bourgeois states, blah blah blah


I don't give a fuck. They are counterrevolutionaries and they can go to their big imperialist sponsorsSo much for the world revolution then

Although, as I said, I'm disturbed that your vision of a post-revolution society features the mass deportation of ethnic groups (even if you're magically weeding out the 'uncooperative ones'). Ethnic cleansing is first and foremost a policy carried out from a position of strength. If you have the power to round up a few million (or even a few hundred thousand) civilians and ship them abroad then why not simply keep tabs on them at home?


If you do join the counterrevolution, though, we will not show you any more mercy than the Bolsheviks showed the whites. That is also our commitment as revolutionary MarxistsAnd you'll note that only one Bolshevik leader used mass deportations as a political tool

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Israel has no right to exist, but calling for its destruction isn't a practical solution, I fear. If I have to choose, I would dissolve the stat of Israel.
But since that isn't really possible to reach, I am glad enough if the Palestinians get their own nation in peace.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

By the way: the real jews are opposed to Israel. Apparantly the Talmud forbids the Jews to have their own state untill the coming of the Messiah:D.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FromOthers/Anti_zionist_protesters.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLwvmkp9xcE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Enkusa%2Eorg%2Factivities%2 Fdemonstrations%2F20090524nyc%2Ecfm&feature=player_embedded

[Yehuda Stern]

ComradeOm: you insist on misunderstanding me. I'm for deporting those who support the counterrevolution. Are you for letting the counterrevolutionaries strike against the revolution without striking back? If so, you're not a revolutionary, let alone a Leninist.

[ComradeOm]

ComradeOm: you insist on misunderstanding me. I'm for deporting those who support the counterrevolution. Are you for letting the counterrevolutionaries strike against the revolution without striking back? If so, you're not a revolutionary, let alone a Leninist.I'm for crushing the counter-revolution at home, not deporting large swathes of the population abroad. Frankly that's just stupid

[Psy]

Indeed the whole discussion is entirely academic. What Israel means by the 'right to exist' is merely recognition of this; ie that that its Jewish population are not going anywhere soon


And yes, we're all committed to the destruction of all bourgeois states, blah blah blah


But Isreal is a bourgeois state. Isreal don't give a fuck about Jewish workers even within Isreal, hell even Nazi Germany with all its rhetoric about building an ayran nation didn't give a fuck about aryan workers as it was a borgeois state that just used racism to divide the workers in order to better exploit them.

Marxists should be telling Isrealis that Isreal is exploiting them and trying to mobilze Isrealis against Isreal, to crush the state of Isreal and place a workers state in its place, a workers state that is united with all the workers of the world and dedicated to a global workers revolution.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

do not have the right to create particular religious demographics by causing the demise of the natives

This is a pretty vulgar comparison and lacking context. But that could be taken from a BNP pamphlet.

As for a 'biblical' justification of Israel's right to exist, it's pretty redundant. I'm gonna scour the bible of justification for someone to make me a sandwich, because I'm hungry and lazy. Do Jews have the right to live in that part of the world? Well, yeah, everyone here should believe in free movement of people, so I can't see that being contended.

Whether Israel can exist in the Middle East is kind of more pertinent, it certainly doesn't have the right to exist as an oppressive state and given the history of Israel it makes reconcilliation with Arab nations difficult.

[Yehuda Stern]

I'm for crushing the counter-revolution at home, not deporting large swathes of the population abroad. Frankly that's just stupid

So, you're against fighting against the counterrevolution, unless it attracts "large swathes of the population?" Really. Some people shouldn't talk about what's stupid.

[ComradeOm]

But Isreal is a bourgeois state. Isreal don't give a fuck about Jewish workers even within Isreal, hell even Nazi Germany with all its rhetoric about building an ayran nation didn't give a fuck about aryan workers as it was a borgeois state that just used racism to divide the workers in order to better exploit them.

Marxists should be telling Isrealis that Isreal is exploiting them and trying to mobilze Isrealis against Isreal, to crush the state of Isreal and place a workers state in its place, a workers state that is united with all the workers of the world and dedicated to a global workers revolution.Be careful not to confuse the terms 'state' and 'nation'. The Israeli state is of course a bourgeois state (and must be torn down, blah blah blah) but this does not necessitate the destruction of the Israeli nation, ie Israelis living in Israel


So, you're against fighting against the counterrevolution, unless it attracts "large swathes of the population?" Really. Some people shouldn't talk about what's stupid.No, I'm against deporting "large swathes of the population". Honestly, this must be the third time I've had to repeat this; just part of it do you not understand? :huh:

Not only is it completely unnecessary to deport such numbers (ethnic cleansing, as I note above, being a policy only enacted from a position of strength) but, in light of previous revolutions, the mischief caused by émigrés is an excellent reason to limit the numbers, counter-revolutionary or otherwise, leaving the country during a revolutionary scenario

[Psy]

Be careful not to confuse the terms 'state' and 'nation'. The Israeli state is of course a bourgeois state (and must be torn down, blah blah blah) but this does not necessitate the destruction of the Israeli nation, ie Israelis living in Israel


Lets have a thought experiment, lets say that Nazi Germany survived WWII becoming West Germany and remaining a "Aryan Nation" only giving who the Nazi German state classed as Aryan any rights in West German society. Now lets fast forward to the fall of Berlin wall and say that Nazi Germany brutally and violently displaced the non Aryans of East Germany. Now would you say that the Aryan nation of Nazi Germany would have a right to exist as a nation (meaning their fascist national identity had a right to exist)? You have to be careful with saying nations have a right to exist or you can fall into the trap of justifying the existence of fascism.

You can't have a Israeli Workers state as you can't have a facist workers state, you can have a workers state in what is currently Israeli but such a state would distroy the very idea of a Jewish state and distory the fascist characture of the Isreali state, meaning it would not only be a totally dirrent state but a totally different nation.

[( R )evolution]

Indeed the whole discussion is entirely academic. What Israel means by the 'right to exist' is merely recognition of this; ie that that its Jewish population are not going anywhere soon




No, Theres a difference between a Jewish state and a state that has jews living in it. How about a state that isnt founded in racist and oppressive policies, which can include the Jewish population and all people. Hmm maybe that

[Yehuda Stern]

And I'm explaining to you again: I never talked about deporting "large swathes of the population," just those who will participate in the counterrevolution.

[ComradeOm]

Lets have a thought experiment, lets say that Nazi Germany survived WWII becoming West Germany and remaining a "Aryan Nation" only giving who the Nazi German state classed as Aryan any rights in West German society. Now lets fast forward to the fall of Berlin wall and say that Nazi Germany brutally and violently displaced the non Aryans of East Germany. Now would you say that the Aryan nation of Nazi Germany would have a right to exist as a nation (meaning their fascist national identity had a right to exist)? You have to be careful with saying nations have a right to exist or you can fall into the trap of justifying the existence of fascismThe idea of an "Aryan Nation" is nonsensical (as in the logic behind it, not your use of it as an example) as its an entirely artificial, and deeply flawed, categorisation. Put bluntly there is no such thing as an Aryan people and the creation of such a 'national identity' is a ridiculous scenario. There are however Germans and Jews and both have the right to national self-determination (http://marxists.catbull.com/archive/lenin/works/1914/self-det/index.htm)


You can't have a Israeli Workers state as you can't have a facist workers state, you can have a workers state in what is currently Israeli but such a state would distroy the very idea of a Jewish state and distory the fascist characture of the Isreali state, meaning it would not only be a totally dirrent state but a totally different nationThe entire logic of which is underpinned by the absurd assumption that there is something inherently "fascist" about an Israeli nation. Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people is the result of calculated and active measures by the Israeli state. The nation of Israeli oppresses no one simply by being in a state of existence!

While the 'nation' and the 'state' are certainly connected it is on a level far more complex and organic that has been portrayed in this discussion. At a practical level the destruction of the Israeli state, the task of the Israeli workers themselves, would not impact on the existence of the Israeli nation. For the Israeli nation to cease to exist it would require that the Israeli population was either removed or somehow stripped of all sense of its 'national identity'; either case requires outside interference and is obviously not in the interests of the Israeli working class


No, Theres a difference between a Jewish state and a state that has jews living in it. How about a state that isnt founded in racist and oppressive policies, which can include the Jewish population and all people. Hmm maybe thatWell, duh. Which is completely divorced from the question of whether the Israeli nation has the right to exist

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Israel is there, and it looks like it will be there for quite some time.
We must concentrate mainl on the struggle of the Palestinian People for liberation and of large portions of the Israeli population for peace.

[Psy]

The idea of an "Aryan Nation" is nonsensical (as in the logic behind it, not your use of it as an example) as its an entirely artificial, and deeply flawed, categorisation. Put bluntly there is no such thing as an Aryan people and the creation of such a 'national identity' is a ridiculous scenario. There are however Germans and Jews and both have the right to national self-determination (http://marxists.catbull.com/archive/lenin/works/1914/self-det/index.htm)

There is no unified Jewish culture (for example Russian Jews don't share the same culture as Polish Jews) thus the idea of a Jewish nation is just as nonsensical as the idea of a Aryan nation.



The entire logic of which is underpinned by the absurd assumption that there is something inherently "fascist" about an Israeli nation. Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people is the result of calculated and active measures by the Israeli state. The nation of Israeli oppresses no one simply by being in a state of existence!

The Jews in Isreal are of many different cultures and nationalities, the only shared national identity simply is a Isreali version of Manifest Destiny (That Isreali Jews has the right to occupy all of what was Palistine).



While the 'nation' and the 'state' are certainly connected it is on a level far more complex and organic that has been portrayed in this discussion. At a practical level the destruction of the Israeli state, the task of the Israeli workers themselves, would not impact on the existence of the Israeli nation. For the Israeli nation to cease to exist it would require that the Israeli population was either removed or somehow stripped of all sense of its 'national identity'; either case requires outside interference and is obviously not in the interests of the Israeli working class

There is no united Jewish national idenity even in Isreali that isn't inheritly facist, how can you say a Russian Jew is of the same nationality as a American Jew even if both lives in Isreal?

[ComradeOm]

There is no unified Jewish culture (for example Russian Jews don't share the same culture as Polish Jews) thus the idea of a Jewish nation is just as nonsensical as the idea of a Aryan nationReally? Surprising then that so many of them did finally manage to get together and create a state :rolleyes:

The history of the Jews is incredibly complex, largely because there is no single history, but what is clear is that some base form of Jewish culture (not least of which being a functional and widely spoken language) did survive throughout the centuries. The fact that we can even refer to Jews in Germany or Jews in Russia, etc, is evidence enough of this. These basic, and at times very latent, customs were not immune to the 19th C tendency of codifying and 'reviving' old languages in the long process of solidifying a national identity in the age of nationstates (in this the Israeli case is little different to France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, etc) and was given a particular catalyst with the harrowing experiences of the Holocaust


The Jews in Isreal are of many different cultures and nationalities, the only shared national identity simply is a Isreali version of Manifest Destiny (That Isreali Jews has the right to occupy all of what was Palistine)The presence of a large population of first-generation immigrants in no way suggests that there are no common bonds* between Israeli citizens. You'd think that after fifty years they'd have developed some, no? What you've pointed out is that Israeli society is remarkably multicultural and that, with the obvious disclaimer regarding discrimination against non-Jews, they've done a successful job of integrating immigrants from across the world into a relatively robust national identity. Are you going to tell me that the US is not a nation because it has a large Hispanic population?

*Beyond of course some political ideal that you've just projected onto every single Jew in Israel. That doesn't strike you as a nationalist thing to do?

[Psy]

Really? Surprising then that so many of them did finally manage to get together and create a state :rolleyes:

The founders of Isreal were a fascist fraction of Jews that even before WWII wanted a powerful Jewish imperialist empire with themselves as the ruling class of this Jewish empire.



The history of the Jews is incredibly complex, largely because there is no single history, but what is clear is that some base form of Jewish culture (not least of which being a functional and widely spoken language) did survive throughout the centuries. The fact that we can even refer to Jews in Germany or Jews in Russia, etc, is evidence enough of this. These basic, and at times very latent, customs were not immune to the 19th C tendency of codifying and 'reviving' old languages in the long process of solidifying a national identity in the age of nationstates (in this the Israeli case is little different to France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, etc) and was given a particular catalyst with the harrowing experiences of the Holocaust

That doesn't make Judaism a national identity.



The presence of a large population of first-generation immigrants in no way suggests that there are no common bonds* between Israeli citizens. You'd think that after fifty years they'd have developed some, no? What you've pointed out is that Israeli society is remarkably multicultural and that, with the obvious disclaimer regarding discrimination against non-Jews, they've done a successful job of integrating immigrants from across the world into a relatively robust national identity. Are you going to tell me that the US is not a nation because it has a large Hispanic population?

There is no untied US national identity that isn't imperialist. The nationality of those in Michigan are totally different then the national identity of those in Texas, the only collective national identity in the US is that of American exceptionalism and US imperialism.



*Beyond of course some political ideal that you've just projected onto every single Jew in Israel. That doesn't strike you as a nationalist thing to do?
I am saying that the Jews of Isreal is of many different national identities and their collective identity of Isreali is one of imperialist conquest.

[ComradeOm]

The founders of Isreal were a fascist fraction of Jews that even before WWII wanted a powerful Jewish imperialist empire with themselves as the ruling class of this Jewish empireSo I hear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion) :rolleyes:


That doesn't make Judaism a national identityNo, it makes it a shared cultural identity. The national identity only really came into being with the actual establishment of the Israeli nation. The process was slightly complicated in the case of Israel but, as I said, not significantly different to contemporary 19th C movements in France, Germany, etc. Particularly so with regards the Gaelic/National Revivals of then-occupied Ireland and Bohemia

Edit: Of course when talking about 'Judaism' one has to be careful in distinguishing between the religion and the ethnic group. Although religion has long been of major importance in the development of national/cultural identities and particularly so in the case of the Jews


There is no untied US national identity that isn't imperialist. The nationality of those in Michigan are totally different then the national identity of those in Texas, the only collective national identity in the US is that of American exceptionalism and US imperialismSo the only thing that binds Americans from Michigan and Americans from Texas is imperialism? Nothing else? There is no form of shared language, culture, or history that these people have in common?

[Psy]

So I hear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion) :rolleyes:

There is a difference from world domination and imperialism.



No, it makes it a shared cultural identity. The national identity only really came into being with the actual establishment of the Israeli nation. The process was slightly complicated in the case of Israel but, as I said, not significantly different to contemporary 19th C movements in France, Germany, etc. Particularly so with regards the Gaelic/National Revivals of then-occupied Ireland and Bohemia

Edit: Of course when talking about 'Judaism' one has to be careful in distinguishing between the religion and the ethnic group. Although religion has long been of major importance in the development of national/cultural identities and particularly so in the case of the Jews

And France and Germany is still made up of a wide variety of national identity. You seem to think that imperialism merges nationalities when all it does it causes nationalities to gravitate to the identity of the nation state, which is why after the October 1917 the Russian empire had all the nationalities that made up the Russian empire assert their unique identity that happened against once the U.S.S.R collapsed. You can bet if Isreal had a workers revolution all the Israelis would break down into unique national identities just like what happened in Russia.



So the only thing that binds Americans from Michigan and Americans from Texas is imperialism? Nothing else? There is no form of shared language, culture, or history that these people have in common?
Shared language doesn't equal shared national identity or would argue that Venezeula has a shared national identity with Spain?

You have a vastly different dialect between Michigans and Texans, vastly different culture and history. Those in Michigan has more in common with those in southern Ontario then those in Texas.

[New Tet]

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/does-israel-really-have-a-right-to-exist/

Does Israel Really Have a Right to Exist?

by Susan Abulhawa / June 15th, 2009

[...]

Yes, Israel has a right to exist, but NOT as a Jewish state.
This is an important distinction that one ought to keep in
mind when asking such questions. Doubtful? Read Tariq Ali.


Israel is a country that was founded by Europeans who came to Palestine, formed terrorist gangs who set about a systematic ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinians from their homes on 78% of Historic Palestine in 1948. Those Palestinians and their descendants still languish in refugee camps. Israel attempted a similar scenario in 1967 when they conquered the remainder of Palestine, but Palestinians then couldn’t be dislodged from their homes as easily [...]

There is an important omission here. Most of those Europeans who came to Palestine were refugees, wretched people who had survived a war of extermination in lands they had foolishly called their own.

[Yehuda Stern]

Most of those Europeans who came to Palestine were refugees, wretched people who had survived a war of extermination in lands they had foolishly called their own.

The Zionist movement sacrificed countless Jews in their deals with anti-Semites, including the Nazis. Why do you think those people were "wretched" or that they were foolish to consider Europe their land?

As a side note, ComradeOm thinks he is smart to demagogically use the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to fend off accusations against Zionism's imperialist ambitions. That's OK - that's the knee-jerk reaction of all pro-Zionists. However, if he would have read on the subject at least as much as he has read on the Bolshevik revolution, he would have found out that the Zionists were very frank about wanting a state from the Nile to the Euphrates.

[ComradeOm]

There is a difference from world domination and imperialismHowever all absurd claims do tend to sound similar. Israel as a fascist empire? This is either intellectual dishonesty (as in wilfully simplifying and distorting the entire debate surrounding Eretz Yisrael) or ignorance


And France and Germany is still made up of a wide variety of national identitySo there is no such thing as a national identity of France, Germany, the US, or indeed any country? This is because, if I'm reading you right, regional identities cannot possibly coexist with national identities. Well that's just bullshit. Usually I'd put together a smart-arse comment or a lengthy explanation here but I really lack the enthusiasm or time to start spelling out what really should be self-evident to all


You seem to think that imperialism merges nationalities when all it does it causes nationalities to gravitate to the identity of the nation state, which is why after the October 1917 the Russian empire had all the nationalities that made up the Russian empire assert their unique identity that happened against once the U.S.S.R collapsed. You can bet if Isreal had a workers revolution all the Israelis would break down into unique national identities just like what happened in RussiaA complete misinterpretation of events in Russia. As you note Russia was an empire and one in which the national identities of its constituent peoples (fully formed in the case of the Finns and Poles, less so in Central Asia) were subjugated to an artificial 'Great Russian' identity imposed from St Petersburg. National identities are organically formed and cannot simply be imposed from above (akin to your suggestion of an 'Aryan Nation'). Far from creating one broad national identity for the entire empire, the actions of the Tsardom (ie, open bias and repeated Russification campaigns) only cemented and further developed the national identities of the oppressed peoples of the empire. When the Tsardom collapsed these nations, as opposed to mere regions, were already fully formed and ripe for giving rise to independent states. Not for nothing was the Empire long known as the "prison of nations"

In Israel, amongst the Jewish population at least, there are no such nations waiting to spring forth. There are Israelis who speak Russian, Israelis who speak French, Israelis who speak English, etc, and there may even be regional differences between the Israelis of Haifa and the Israelis of Beersheba (for example) but they are all Israelis living in a unitary state. I have seen nothing to suggest that should this state disappear tomorrow then the entire nation would devolve into petty regions akin to the fiefdoms of medieval Europe


Shared language doesn't equal shared national identity or would argue that Venezeula has a shared national identity with Spain?Of course not, that would both be stupid and contradict the entire point. Language is an extremely important element of a national identity but is only one component. As you'd know if you hadn't ignored the other few example criteria that I'd provided in the above post

[RHIZOMES]

I love how the bourgeois media transfers "rights" onto a capitalist state apparatus and talks about Israel like it was some persecuted minority in a hostile world.

[Yehuda Stern]

I have seen nothing to suggest that should this state disappear tomorrow then the entire nation would devolve into petty regions akin to the fiefdoms of medieval Europe

Well, that's because you do not live in Israel and apparently don't know anything about it. There is nothing but hostility among the different sects that make up the Jewish settler population, including overt racism and hate. Any Israeli would find your suggestion otherwise to be highly comical, as this Israeli certainly does.

[New Tet]

The Zionist movement sacrificed countless Jews in their deals with anti-Semites, including the Nazis. Why do you think those people were "wretched" or that they were foolish to consider Europe their land?

Because a great number of those Europeans, the ones alluded to in the essay that heads this discussion, were marginalized, persecuted, rounded up, interned in concentration camps, tortured, worked to death, and murdered with hardly a voice raised in their favor. That's why they were wretched.

Before the rise of Fascism in Europe, most European Jews were not interested in carving up a "promised land" out of Palestine. Despite their less than perfect lives in a Europe full of prejudice and hatred against them, they considered themselves citizens of their respective countries only to discover that their formal political status was a thing of air. That's why they were "foolish" to consider Europe their home land.

[Psy]

However all absurd claims do tend to sound similar. Israel as a fascist empire? This is either intellectual dishonesty (as in wilfully simplifying and distorting the entire debate surrounding Eretz Yisrael) or ignorance

And how exactly is Isreal different from Nazi Germany in 1936? Isreal has forcibly relocated Arabs into large ghettos, Isreal has expropriated Arab property and handed them to capitalist Jews, Nazi Germany did both to Jews in 1936 (wasn't till 1938 till Nazi Germany sent Jews to concentration camps).



So there is no such thing as a national identity of France, Germany, the US, or indeed any country? This is because, if I'm reading you right, regional identities cannot possibly coexist with national identities. Well that's just bullshit. Usually I'd put together a smart-arse comment or a lengthy explanation here but I really lack the enthusiasm or time to start spelling out what really should be self-evident to all

No I said that imperialism doesn't merge national identities just causes them to gravitate to the identitiy of the state.



A complete misinterpretation of events in Russia. As you note Russia was an empire and one in which the national identities of its constituent peoples (fully formed in the case of the Finns and Poles, less so in Central Asia) were subjugated to an artificial 'Great Russian' identity imposed from St Petersburg. National identities are organically formed and cannot simply be imposed from above (akin to your suggestion of an 'Aryan Nation').

That is how the US, France, Germany and Italy was formed. For example it is not like the people of the German states didn't one day realize they were all the same nationality, they were formed into one state idenity from above by the ruling classes.



In Israel, amongst the Jewish population at least, there are no such nations waiting to spring forth. There are Israelis who speak Russian, Israelis who speak French, Israelis who speak English, etc, and there may even be regional differences between the Israelis of Haifa and the Israelis of Beersheba (for example) but they are all Israelis living in a unitary state. I have seen nothing to suggest that should this state disappear tomorrow then the entire nation would devolve into petty regions akin to the fiefdoms of medieval Europe

That is not what happened in Russia, what happened in Russia was when the question of nationality came up the Bolshivks had to adress the fact there was many nationalities all looking for some form of representation in the workers state.

Same would happen in Isreal, the instant you have the beginnings of workers state in what is now Isreal all these groups would start looking for some form repsentation and once you do that all the nationalities would gravitate less toward the identity of the state.



Of course not, that would both be stupid and contradict the entire point. Language is an extremely important element of a national identity but is only one component. As you'd know if you hadn't ignored the other few example criteria that I'd provided in the above post
Like I said Texans and Michgans have different dialects, different histories, different experiences and different cultures.