Jewish nationhood?

[jake williams]

Hi OI:

Hopefully this discussion can be civil and productive here, because I think this might be a bit of a different way of framing this particular conversation than I'm used to hearing, and I'd be curious to see how it goes. I'm doing it here because I think a lot of the conversations about Israel on the main forums get caught up in debates about statehood and national liberation, some of which have "tendancy war" undertones and which rarely go very far.

The typical argument for Zionism, from the left or the right, goes basically as follows (I think this much is relatively uncontroversial, but do correct me if you think I'm wrong). In an era where international relations and global politics are dominated by a system of states modeled on European nation states, the Jewish people are a nation without a state. And between their historical roots in Palestine as a diasporic people and the horrors of European anti-semitism, such a state within Europe is untenable and a state in Palestine would both be more realistic and more in keeping with a "global" Jewish nation rather than a strictly European one.

On this point I have three questions that I would be curious to hear opinions on. I might submit my views if the conversation is interesting. Apologies if there is a thread on this specific topic, I wasn't sure of a realistic way to search. Anyway, without further ado:

1. Do the Jewish people (or some subset of Jewish people) constitute a "nation", according to your definition? (which subset?)

2. Are national groups entitled to states or, at very least, is it a reasonable, viable, or useful demand for stateless national groups (Basques, Kurds, Quebec) to make?

3. a) If your answers are yes to 1) and 2), should Israel act as this state?
b) If you answered no to 1) or 2), do you still support the existence of an Israeli state and if so, why?

[Nox]

nvm

[Revolutionair]

The state of Israel supports the interests of the Zionists, not of the Jewish people.

What exactly is your definition of zionism? If it is: the desire of Jews to create or maintain a nation-state near the mountain of Zion, isn't it the 'job' of the Israeli government to support zionism?

[Die Rote Fahne]

I agree that Jewish people constitute a nation, I agree that national groups are entitled to states or at least autonomy, I kind of support the existence of a state that the Jewish people can call home (preferably Palestine shared with the Palestinians, or Palestine divided up in a much more fair way), but I certainly do not support the largest terrorist organisation in the world, the Israeli government.

The state of Israel supports the interests of the Zionists, not of the Jewish people.
How can such a state be Jewish, if it is shared with non-jews and is equal in rights and all that?

[Nox]

nvm

[Nox]

nvm

[Die Rote Fahne]

When I say 'Jewish state', I mean a state that the Jews can call home. I do not mean a state that only the jews can call home.
Jews can call any state home, why does it matter that a single strip of land is designated for that purpose?

[Sensible Socialist]

I define Zionism as being what the Israeli government is doing right now. Oppressing the Palestinians, discriminating people of other religions in Israel, blockading the Gaza strip and west bank.
You can't make up your own definitions. Zionism is the support of a Jewish state, which you also seem to be changing the definition of below.


I do not define the creation of a Jewish state to be Zionism,
That's too bad: it is.



When I say 'Jewish state', I mean a state that the Jews can call home. I do not mean a state that only the jews can call home.
Again, a Jewish state is a state for jews primarily. They can live in any state without it being called a Jewish state.

[Nox]

nvm

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

1. No.

2. No.

and

3. No.

The whole idea of "nations" is yet another manifestation of the sort of tribalistic behaviour we should be working to overcome. It also fails to make sense in the context of a world in which mass migration is a daily reality.

We should be forging new identities that are inclusive of the whole human species, not just those who were lucky/unlucky enough to be born in a particular area of the Earth's surface.

Fuck all nations. They are soaked in the blood of our ancestors' mistakes.

[Nox]

nvm

[Die Rote Fahne]

Because that is where their religion, and they themselves originate. It's the only logical place that can be called their home.

I don't see why people here are so opposed to a shared Palestinian state between Jews and Muslims and all other religions.
The point is that it can't be a Jewish state then. Because, not only did Judaism have it's roots there, so did Christianity and Islam. I mean, therefore it would also be a Christian and Muslim homeland/state as well.

[Nox]

Please just ignore all of my posts, I was trying to make a point but worded everything wrong and made myself look like a Zionist :(

[Viet Minh]

1. Do the Jewish people (or some subset of Jewish people) constitute a "nation", according to your definition? (which subset?)


In the sense that jews (as a religious group) have their own laws and hierarchy then yes, I suppose you could make that argument, although I don't support theocratic statehood. As an ethnic group no, they don't constitute a nation, and neither should they or any other ethnic group.


2. Are national groups entitled to states or, at very least, is it a reasonable, viable, or useful demand for stateless national groups (Basques, Kurds, Quebec) to make?

No. First of all we should avoid lumping people together as national groups in the first place, second as individuals we should all work to dismantle the nations and borders which imprison us, not seek to create new ones.



3. a) If your answers are yes to 1) and 2), should Israel act as this state?
b) If you answered no to 1) or 2), do you still support the existence of an Israeli state and if so, why?


b) No, I don't support the existence of any state. I do support the existence of jews in the middle east, and their right to defend themselves, but that does not extend to aggression towards palestinian civilians.

[Revy]

1. Do the Jewish people (or some subset of Jewish people) constitute a "nation", according to your definition? (which subset?)

No, but that is because the concept of nation is thought of in the territorial sense. Israeli is considered a nationality, but not Jewish.

2. Are national groups entitled to states or, at very least, is it a reasonable, viable, or useful demand for stateless national groups (Basques, Kurds, Quebec) to make?

I think such movements can be progressive if under a highly oppressive situation. Otherwise, we basically have nationalism based around ethnic/religious/linguistic grounds. Somehow the working class of an ethno-linguistic group is supposed to have validation that they have their own nation-state and support the ascendant bourgeois ruling class of that state.

3. a) If your answers are yes to 1) and 2), should Israel act as this state?
b) If you answered no to 1) or 2), do you still support the existence of an Israeli state and if so, why?

If the Palestinians have their own sovereign state, it would be a step up from their situation under Israel's own one-state solution of settlement, occupation, and land theft. And a one-state solution may become more possible once a two-state solution has been achieved. But what is sure is the status quo cannot continue.

[MarxSchmarx]

Even if we were to accept the Jewish people should get thier own state, I don't understand why a zionist homeland of sorts can't be in europe and why the palestinians should be subject to eviction any more than, say, the austrians.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Even if we were to accept the Jewish people should get thier own state, I don't understand why a zionist homeland of sorts can't be in europe and why the palestinians should be subject to eviction any more than, say, the austrians.

Because when the Zionist movement started to gain major traction, the Jews wanted to get the fuck out of Europe as quickly as possible.

[MarxSchmarx]

Because when the Zionist movement started to gain major traction, the Jews wanted to get the fuck out of Europe as quickly as possible.

I'm not sure that's all. First, there was some thought about buidling a Jewish state in Uganda or South America but both went nowhere. The soviet union and Japan both offered autonomous Jewish regions with for the time considerable self-government but these were flatly rejected. The irony was that at this time, Palestine was ruled by Britain, a European power.

[Apoi_Viitor]

I'm not sure that's all. First, there was some thought about buidling a Jewish state in Uganda or South America but both went nowhere. The soviet union and Japan both offered autonomous Jewish regions with for the time considerable self-government but these were flatly rejected. The irony was that at this time, Palestine was ruled by Britain, a European power.

There was also talk about a Jewish state being placed in the Midwest, if I recall.

[Die Rote Fahne]

There was also talk about a Jewish state being placed in the Midwest, if I recall.

Madagascar was considered at some point as well, I believe.

[RevLeft By Birth]

1. Do the Jewish people (or some subset of Jewish people) constitute a "nation", according to your definition? (which subset?)

2. Are national groups entitled to states or, at very least, is it a reasonable, viable, or useful demand for stateless national groups (Basques, Kurds, Quebec) to make?

3. a) If your answers are yes to 1) and 2), should Israel act as this state?
b) If you answered no to 1) or 2), do you still support the existence of an Israeli state and if so, why?

1. No, the Jewish people do not constitute a nation in the sense as Kim Jong Il defined it. A nation, as he correctly explained, is formed through the bond of a people to the land and the sharing of common blood which unites them.

2. Oppressed national groups, conquered by greater powers, as Korea was by the Japanese, should have their independence.

3. No because the Israeli people had no connection to that land and had left it many years before.

[thefinalmarch]

A nation, as he correctly explained, is formed through the bond of a people to the land and the sharing of common blood which unites them.
Oh christ almighty, what is this bullshit mysticism?

Anyway, I won't bother properly answering the OP's question in the desired format, but I'm of the belief that there is no concrete definition of what actually constitutes a nation. Some say that it is a group of people who share common history and culture (this then prompts me to ask, "Well then just what degree of commonality of history and culture between people must exist in order for said people to constitute a nation?" ), whilst others argue that anyone who lives in x region belongs to x nation. Others, still, argue that if you self-identify as belonging to x nation, you are for all intents and purposes a member of x nation.

Nations have no basis in reality, and are largely constructs of the capitalist classes. I do not recognise the existence of any nations or ethnicities, only cultures - and even then, there is considerable overlap of particular aspects between cultures. For this reason Jews do not constitute a nation, nor are they entitled to a state of their own. No arbitrarily-defined peoples are entitled to "their" own state, as it is not only divisive, but a state in any of the forms we have seen it exist is necessarily advantageous only to the ruling class. Adherents of Judaism are the only individuals I recognise as being Jewish in any sense of the word.

[RevLeft By Birth]

Oh christ almighty, what is this bullshit mysticism?

Itsnot bullshit its Juche

[thefinalmarch]

Itsnot bullshit its Juche
I think you'll find Juche is the very definition of bullshit.

[hatzel]

Madagascar was considered at some point as well, I believe.

I do believe the Madagascar idea was predominantly considered by the Nazis, as a place of exile where that stuff couldn't contaminate the rest of the world or whatever you want to call it. When it comes to political Zionism as it stands, that supposedly founding text, Herzl's Der Judenstaat, only considered Argentina or Palestine, weighing up the pros and cons of each. And Argentina was relatively quickly abandoned as a plan. Those who still went looking around in Latin America, Africa, Australia etc. were Territorialists, rather than Zionists...though of course proto-Territorialism was merely one strand of Zionism during the 19th century, before it needed to establish itself as a distinct current with the increasing dominance of the (post-)Herzlites in the ZO...

[Thirsty Crow]

First of all, I think that the best perspective to determining the character and significance, for us as communists, of nation building and state formation is the historical perspective.

From this perspective, it is clear that the nation building as a process was exclusively related to the process of the unification of "internal" market, as well as of its agents (the capitalist enterprise) which took up the form of the modern state, which also functions not only as a regulating instance with respect to the before mentioned market, but also with respect to interactions with other such formations and the global capitalist market.

In other words, I believe that state formation is part of a bourgeois revolution, of forming a concentrated expression of bourgeois interests.

In that sense, I think that the formation of the Israeli state was a profoundly reactionary process, predicated upon the systematic opression of other groups living in the area, aimed at establishing the dominance of a specific borugeois group.
I don't think I could answer the question posted in OP since I don't think that it is possible, or politically prudent, to devise a list of characteristics which would then be mechanically applied to every group in an ahistorical manner. Also, that cannot account for the real history of nation formations since these were inextricably connected with the consolidation of class power, which did take on several ideological forms, such as the ideology of common ancestry and common heritage, but these are not the primary and dominant factor here.

[Viet Minh]

1. No, the Jewish people do not constitute a nation in the sense as Kim Jong Il defined it. A nation, as he correctly explained, is formed through the bond of a people to the land and the sharing of common blood which unites them.

2. Oppressed national groups, conquered by greater powers, as Korea was by the Japanese, should have their independence.

3. No because the Israeli people had no connection to that land and had left it many years before.

1. But by that rather vague definition even the white nationalists would constitute a nation

2. What exactly is the yardstick of opression? I'm not convinced that the Korean people being opressed in Japan are much worse off than the Korean people being opressed in NoKo.

3. Many were forced out by various other invaders such as the arabs, greeks, romans, ottoman empire, crusaders etc. Jews left germany many years before, and had no connection to that land, should they not be allowed to return there? I'm not arguing for the Israeli state here as such, its just your comment seems to imply jews have no right to be in the middle east whatsoever. If I've misinterpreted your comments then I apologise.

[Dr Mindbender]

Itsnot bullshit its Juche

Its frightening how similar it sounds to fascism


the sharing of common blood which unites them.

[Rafiq]

I support the abolishment of the "Jewish State" only if it is abolished at the same time with every other state. I fail to see how it shouldn't remain if we are not going to make plans to abolish states in Europe or Asia, or anywhere else as well.

Israel is not a special case.

For Israel today, a workers revolution and the creation of a country where all ethnicities have complete equal rights, where discrimination among the masses is put to an end wouldn't be so bad.

[ColonelCossack]

zionism=lebensraum

[ComradeMan]

The Jews are a people inasmuch the Roma are a people ;) inasmuch as any "people" who define themselves as such are a people. To argue the opposite whilst acknowledging other "peoples" is blatant anti-semitism.

Jew =/= Israeli
Jew =/= Zionist
:(

[RevLeft By Birth]

The Jews are a people inasmuch the Roma are a people ;) inasmuch as any "people" who define themselves as such are a people. To argue the opposite whilst acknowledging other "peoples" is blatant anti-semitism.

Jew =/= Israeli
Jew =/= Zionist
:(

Other small peoples are not causing the same sort of unrest and chaos in the rest of the world, so even if its not fare it makes sense so much focus goes on Israel whose existence angers the entire middle east, including many progressive middle eastern peoples.

[thefinalmarch]

Other small peoples are not causing the same sort of unrest and chaos in the rest of the world, so even if its not fare it makes sense so much focus goes on Israel whose existence angers the entire middle east, including many progressive middle eastern peoples.
Entire peoples can be labelled progressive? These ethnicities you speak of are homogeneous entities with a single world-view and belief system? The Jewish "nation" is not a cause of unrest and chaos. Unrest and chaos are the result of the contradictions inherent in capitalism, taking the form of struggle between capital and labour -- no "people" has any sort of inherent predisposition to it. Well sure, there are plenty of ethnic or religious nationalists with an expansionist ideology in Israel, but there are also many ordinary workers with no care whatsoever for Zionism. Inside Israel, there are oppressed workers just as in any other country -- the housing protests currently taking place there are a testament to that.

[Revolutionair]

bullshit

Bann this idiot.

[ComradeMan]

Other small peoples are not causing the same sort of unrest and chaos in the rest of the world, so even if its not fare it makes sense so much focus goes on Israel whose existence angers the entire middle east, including many progressive middle eastern peoples.

Ah, so now the "Jews" are causing trouble? Every post you make convinces me more of how "fascistic" Juche is.

[RevLeft By Birth]

Entire peoples can be labelled progressive? These ethnicities you speak of are homogeneous entities with a single world-view and belief system? The Jewish "nation" is not a cause of unrest and chaos. Unrest and chaos are the result of the contradictions inherent in capitalism, taking the form of struggle between capital and labour -- no "people" has any sort of inherent predisposition to it. Well sure, there are plenty of ethnic or religious nationalists with an expansionist ideology in Israel, but there are also many ordinary workers with no care whatsoever for Zionism. Inside Israel, there are oppressed workers just as in any other country -- the housing protests currently taking place there are a testament to that.

No I mean the progressive members of middle eastern countries, even many left leaning parties in the middle east are opposed to the existence of Israel. I have no problem with jews (Marx was part Jewish) just all the instability that Israel creates and I think there would be a much better situation in the middle east if it did not exist.

[RED DAVE]

(Marx was part Jewish)Learn your history before you run your mouth. Marx was all Jewish at birth; however, his father converted. It is your responsibility when you post to know what you are talking about or ask for help.

RED DAVE

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Noam Chomsky in one his early books makes the case that Israel becoming a state was destructive of whatever socialist institutions existed among the Jewish settlers. Chomsky regarded and regards himself as a "left Zionist". There were other directions things could have gone in. Upon independence the Israeli Communist Party was the largest party and many settlers were socialists. This heritage was inevitably destroyed by Israel becoming another "herrenvolk" settler state.

The Jewish people could be regarded as a "nation" who (if desired) should have the right for linguistic and cultural self determination free from persecution.Whether this required a state encompassing a region where another people lived is another matter.As Menochio said, a state repressents the needs of a certain stage of capitalist development.

Trotsky somewhere alluded to the fact that a full settlement of the "nationality issue" cannot occur under capitalism.

The Nakba, the dispossession of a whole community of people, was a tragedy. The important questions now have to do with the future. What do we do now?

Nobody should take "Juche" the least bit seriously, unless as a videogame.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

This is a good read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yiddish_Policemen%27s_Union

[Dr Mindbender]

I like how RBB has thus far failed to acknowledge my point about how Juche has fundamental common ground with fascism.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Juche gets a good write up on WN sites. The "DPRK" is often seen as the perfect National Socialist state. Of course neither Jucheists nor WN can be counted on for much rationality.

[Apoi_Viitor]

http://www.korea-dpr.com/lib/111.pdf

Best part is the last two pages where he slams trade and immigration for ruining national identities...

[Dr Mindbender]

Juche gets a good write up on WN sites. The "DPRK" is often seen as the perfect National Socialist state. Of course neither Jucheists nor WN can be counted on for much rationality.

Im not surprised WN's and nazis love North Korea, its one of the few countries where its inhabitants cannot leave!

[RevLeft By Birth]

I like how RBB has thus far failed to acknowledge my point about how Juche has fundamental common ground with fascism.

Because this claim makes no sense?? The DPRK, especially Kim Il Sung fought against fascism, also in their writings they repeatedly denounced it.


http://www.korea-dpr.com/lib/111.pdf

Best part is the last two pages where he slams trade and immigration for ruining national identities...

He is denouncing globalization and the policy of cultural assimilation that the Japanese are perpetrating against Koreans in Japan, which is resulting in an increasing number of Koreans in Japan who identify themselves as Japanese, denying their Korean heritage. Over one million Koreans were moved to Japan as laborers, many of them staying after the war. The imperialist countries always work to assimilate minority groups and make them forget their heritage.

[RGacky3]

Because this claim makes no sense?? The DPRK, especially Kim Il Sung fought against fascism, also in their writings they repeatedly denounced it.


yes, but we are tlaking about real life, not what Kim Il said.


which is resulting in an increasing number of Koreans in Japan who identify themselves as Japanese, denying their Korean heritage.

who cares?

[Viet Minh]

Because this claim makes no sense?? The DPRK, especially Kim Il Sung fought against fascism, also in their writings they repeatedly denounced it.

That would make Israel antifascist too, considering their hunt for nazi war criminals etc, and continued written denunciations of fascism.


He is denouncing globalization and the policy of cultural assimilation that the Japanese are perpetrating against Koreans in Japan, which is resulting in an increasing number of Koreans in Japan who identify themselves as Japanese, denying their Korean heritage. Over one million Koreans were moved to Japan as laborers, many of them staying after the war. The imperialist countries always work to assimilate minority groups and make them forget their heritage.


Identify themselves

Well if they are Japanese citizens, their nationality is Japanese. I don't know what ethnic group(s) Koreans are compared to japanese etc but who cares really? If they live in Japan they have every right to identify as Japanese if they wish. If they feel forced to in order to find work or for social interaction etc then thats an issue of concern. As you can imagine I have very little respect for the Giovernment of Japan, Japans warmongering history and the social hierarchy there etc, but I don't see much evidence of forced assimilation. For instance North Koreans can send their children to Korean speaking schools where they teach allegiance to N. Korea.

[Per Levy]

He is denouncing globalization and the policy of cultural assimilation that the Japanese are perpetrating against Koreans in Japan, which is resulting in an increasing number of Koreans in Japan who identify themselves as Japanese, denying their Korean heritage. Over one million Koreans were moved to Japan as laborers, many of them staying after the war. The imperialist countries always work to assimilate minority groups and make them forget their heritage.

and your point is? i see myself as a worker and human being, i couldnt care less about my "national identity". you on the other hand seem to think that national identity is super importent and stuff.