Jewish American Heritage Month

Posted By admin on January 10, 2019

This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

00:02:18 1 Terminology00:03:17 2 Overview00:07:45 3 Beliefs00:10:43 4 History00:18:39 4.1 Territories considered00:21:42 4.2 Balfour Declaration and the Palestine Mandate00:25:10 4.3 Rise of Hitler00:28:14 4.4 Post-WWII00:32:40 5 Types00:34:45 5.1 Labour Zionism00:37:01 5.2 Liberal Zionism00:39:44 5.3 Revisionist Zionism00:41:44 5.4 Religious Zionism00:42:32 5.5 Green Zionism00:42:52 5.6 Post-Zionism00:43:26 6 Non-Jewish support00:44:44 6.1 Christian Zionism00:47:58 6.2 Muslim Zionism00:50:15 6.3 Hindu support for Zionism00:51:34 7 Anti-Zionism00:53:28 7.1 Catholic Church and Zionism00:56:29 7.2 Characterization as colonialism or ethnic cleansing01:01:26 7.3 Characterization as racist01:06:05 7.4 Haredi Judaism and Zionism01:11:05 7.5 Anti-Zionism or antisemitism01:17:34 8 Marcus Garvey and Black Zionism01:18:42 9 See also

Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.

Learning by listening is a great way to:- increases imagination and understanding- improves your listening skills- improves your own spoken accent- learn while on the move- reduce eye strain

Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.

Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:https://assistant.google.com/services...Other Wikipedia audio articles at:https://www.youtube.com/results?searc...Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-ttsSpeaking Rate: 0.989981553889576Voice name: en-GB-Wavenet-D

"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."- Socrates

SUMMARY=======Zionism (Hebrew: Tsiyyonut [tsijonut] after Zion) is the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel (roughly corresponding to Canaan, the Holy Land, or the region of Palestine). Modern Zionism emerged in the late 19th century in Central and Eastern Europe as a national revival movement, both in reaction to newer waves of antisemitism and as an imitative response to other nationalist movements. Soon after this, most leaders of the movement associated the main goal with creating the desired state in Palestine, then an area controlled by the Ottoman Empire.Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that they experienced during their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and to address threats to its continued existence and security.A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state. A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations to their ancestral homeland. Critics of Zionism view it as a colonialist, racist and exceptionalist ideology that led advocates to violence during Mandatory Palestine, followed by the exodus of Palestinians, and the subsequent denial of their right to return to property lost during the 1948 war.

Read the original post:
Zionism | Wikipedia audio article

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Zionism | Wikipedia audio article
Tags:

Posted By admin on January 8, 2019

The relationship between Haredim and Zionism has always been a difficult one. Before the establishment of the State of Israel, the majority of Haredi Jewry was opposed to Zionism.[1] However, after the de facto creation of the state, each individual movement within Orthodox Judaism charted its own path in their approach to the State of Israel. A study in late 2006 claimed that just over a third of Israelis considered Haredim the most hated group in Israel.[2]

Ashkenazic religious Jews, both Hasidim and the Perushim, started to immigrate to the Land of Israel in the 18th century, long before the founding of the Zionist movement, and continued to do so in the 19th century. Karliner Hasidim had an early foothold, and the Lelover Rebbe settled there in 1850. Sanz established itself in Safed in the 1870s, and Ruzhin had a major presence in Jerusalem at about the same time. During the 19th century there was a vibrant Haredi community in Jerusalem. In 1925 the Hasidim of the Imrei Emes of Ger established the Sfas Emes Yeshiva in Jerusalem.

The advent of secular Zionism, whose goal was to transplant Jews to the Land of Israel in a society devoid of Torah values, was the antithesis of the aims of Jews who were already established there.[weaselwords]

After 1918, immigration was controlled by the British, who had been given a mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations. They restricted immigration of Jews, and operated a quota by means of certificates. The distribution of these certificates was in the hands of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, a Zionist organization. The allocation of certificates to Haredi Jews was severely restricted so as not to compromise the goal of a secular state.

After World War II many Jewish refugees found themeselves in displaced person camps. The Zionists controlled a camp for Jewish refugee children in Tehran where they operated an anti-religious policy in an effort to cut off Haredi children from their spiritual roots. To a large extent they were successful, and many children from Haredi homes were dispatched to irreligious settlements.[3][unreliable source?]

The relationship between Haredim and Zionism became more complex after the founding of the State of Israel in 1948. Some Haredi groups adopted a pragmatic position, and involved themselves in the political process of the state by voting in elections and accepting state funding. Others have maintained a more hardline rejectionist position, refusing all funding from the Israeli state and abstaining from taking part in the political process. The positions of specific Haredi groups are discussed in greater detail in the remainder of the article.

There is also a growing group of Orthodox Jews known as Hardalim. They are formerly Religious Zionists who moved in their religious observances and philosophy towards Haredi Judaism. Socially, however, they still form a part of the Religious Zionist world, and not of the Haredi world.

United Torah Judaism and Shas are the only two Haredi parties in the Israeli Knesset which advocate a halachic state. In addition, even the anti-Zionist Satmar Hasidim do take part in municipal elections in some places, such as the Haredi stronghold of Bnei Brak.

Notably, there is a substantial difference in the positions taken by Ashkenazi and Sephardi Haredim, the latter generally being quite supportive of Zionism.

Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, the first Satmar Rebbe, in his book Vayoel Moshe, calls the creation of the Israeli state an "act of Satan",[4] blames Zionism for the Holocaust[5] and the greatest form of spiritual impurity in the entire world.[6] Many Orthodox, including many Hasidic groups, have adopted his approach.

The Agudat Israel is an international organization (with an Israeli association) of various Haredi groups, mainly from the Lithuanian yeshiva communities and Hasidic groups such as Ger and Belz. It initially adopted a stance of disregard for the State of Israel, motivated by pragmatism. They attempted to influence the politics of the State of Israel from within, by participating in national elections and sending their representatives to the Israeli Knesset, but still did not take full part in it by not serving in its military and not celebrating any of the State's official holidays. Today the organization has shifted over time to somewhat supportive of the state, although not officially recognizing itself as a pro-Zionist party. An example of this is the revolutionary Hesder legions in the I.D.F., which is a unit that combines religious studies and national service, designed specially for Haredi Jews. The Agudat Israel party in the Knesset is represented as United Torah Judaism, a collective party of Agudat Israel and Degel HaTorah. It tries to influence the Knesset with a pro-Judaism outlook, by mainly focusing on funding for Jewish education (yeshivas), exemption from military service for religious students, and trying to strengthen Israel's Jewish identity.

Sephardi Haredim are generally supportive of Zionism and the State of Israel, certainly moreso than their Ashkenazi counterparts. The number of outspoken opponents of Zionism among Sephardi or Mizrahi rabbis is far lower than among Ashkenazi rabbis, and these constitute a small minority of the Sephardi Haredi leadership.

The Sephardi Haredi political party in the Knesset is Shas, which represents the vast majority of Sephardi Haredim, and is headed by Rabbi Eli Yishai. In 2010, Shas joined the World Zionist Organization and officially became the first Zionist Haredi party.[7] The party's spiritual leader, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, opposes saying Hallel in the Yom HaAtzmaut prayer service, but writes that "one may say Hallel after the completion of the prayers, without the blessing..."[8] While in the past, when he served as Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, he wrote that one should say Hallel (though without the blessings preceding and following it), he later changed his position.

There are a number of Sephardic organizations and rabbis who actively oppose the state, such as Rabbi Yaakov Hillel and the Edah HaCharedit HaSefaradit, a Sephardic organization similar and parallel to the Ashkenazic Edah HaChareidis.

There are many different ideological reasons for religious opposition to Zionism; however, the main two are most widely expressed by Hasidim and Lithuanian Haredeim.

Historically, many dynasties in Hasidism have expressed anti-Zionist opinions because of the 'Three Oaths'. The Talmud, in Ketubot 111a, mentions that the Jewish people have been bound by three oaths: 1) not to ascend to Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) as a group using force; 2) not to rebel against the nations of the world; and 3) that the nations of the world would not persecute the nation of Israel excessively.[9] Some consider the establishment of the State of Israel to be a violation of these oaths. The first Hasidic anti-Zionist movement was Agudath Israel, established in Poland in 1912.[10] Hareidi groups and people actively and publicly opposing Zionism are Satmar,[11] Toldos Aharon,[12] Neturei Karta.[11]

Lithuanian Haredim, sometimes called mitnagdim, take a different approach to their beliefs from their Hassidic counterparts. Lithuanian religious Jews oppose the state not because of the three oaths midrash but because they feel that Zionism epitomizes secularity and Jewish desire to be void of Torah. Many Lithuanian religious Jews, such as Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv, have been involved with Zionist politics as Israel progressively becomes more Jewish-oriented.

Amongst the Ashkenazi Orthodox rabbinical leadership, religious Zionists form a minority.[13] Sephardi Haredi authorities have never shared the anti-Zionism of their Ashkenazi counterparts, and some (such as Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu) are strongly affiliated with Religious Zionism.

The Satmar Hasidic movement, whose previous Rebbe, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum wrote in the 1960s an extensive critique of Zionism entitled Vayoel Moshe (see Sefer Vayoel Moshe below), counts more than 130,000 members. This does not include a number of smaller and related anti-Zionist Hungarian Hasidic groups that align themselves with Satmar.[14]

The Central Rabbinical Congress or CRC is an American rabbinical organization which consists mainly of Satmar and some smaller but similar Hasidic groups. It is centered in New York's Kiryas Joel, Williamsburg, and Boro Park. In 1986 the CRC publicized the following declaration:

A small group holding this ideology is Neturei Karta, with bases in Jerusalem, Beit Shemesh and New York. An extreme faction of Neturei Karta which openly display support for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Palestine Liberation Organization as well as Hamas has been condemned by nearly all other anti-Zionist Haredim, including, on occasion, Satmar [16] and the Edah HaChareidis. There are also moderates within the Neturei Karta itself, critical of some of the more extreme positions taken.[17]

In July 1947, less than a year before the actual founding of the State of Israel, Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, who was both the leader of the Dushinsky movement and the Ashkenazi Haredi Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem, of the Edah HaChareidis Rabbinical Council, delivered a personal statement on behalf of the Edah HaChareidis to the United Nations, declaring his "definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine." In 2002, Grand Rabbi Yisroel Moshe Dushinsky, son of Rabbi Yosef Tzvi, wrote a letter of recommendation to a new edition of the Satmar Rebbe's book Vayoel Moshe.[18]

Shomer Emunim is a devout, insular Hasidic sect which is similar to Neturei Karta. It was founded in the 20th century by Rabbi Arele (Aharon) Roth. Based in Meah Shearim, Jerusalem, and Bnei Brak. Sometimes referred to as Toldos Aharon (literally, Generation of Aharon, after the founder) although this is actually one of its sub-groups.

Mishkenos HoRoim is a small and obscure Hasidic group located in Meah Shearim, Jerusalem, (and Ramat Beit Shemesh Bet). It is known as a very isolated and fervently religious group, known for its virulent anti-Zionism, even by Haredi standards.

The Edah HaChareidis is Jerusalem's umbrella organisation of anti-Zionist Haredim and is not really a Haredi group itself. It includes groups such as the Jerusalem branch of Satmar and Dushinsky and also less anti-Zionist groups such as Brisk and (parts of) Breslov.

A number of Lithuanian leaders like the Chazon Ish (1878-1953), Rav Shach (1898-2001), and Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv, have expressed strongly anti-Zionist views. Examples of this are found in lectures and letters of Rav Shach.[19] One of the newspapers of the Litvish world, the Yated Neeman, regularly publishes articles strongly criticizing Zionism, naming it a "heretical movement". The main Litvish community does vote, as per the instructions of the Chazon Ish.[20] Rabbi Elyashiv urges his students to vote for the Degel HaTorah list. Rabbi Shimshon Dovid Pincus, quoted in the book of his speeches about Purim, explains that in each generation the Yetzer Hara (evil inclination) appears in different forms. Examples he gives are the Enlightenment and communism. He goes on to explain that nowadays, Zionism is a form of the Yetzer Hara. The opposition of the Litvish world against Zionism differs from that of the Hasidic world in that it is mainly focused on the secular character of Zionism, and less strongly so on the issue of a Jewish state being forbidden whether it is religious or not.

Nonetheless, one of the American leaders of the Lithuanian Jewish world, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (1895-1986), expressed something approaching ambivalent support of the State of Israel, claiming that it is proper to pray for the Welfare of the State of Israel, so long as one does not call it the "first flowering of the redemption." (The reference is to the standard Zionist prayer for the Welfare of the State of Israel, which refers to the State as the first flowering of the Redemption.) In a responsa to a question whether it is permissible to pray in a synagogue which displays an Israeli flag, he writes "Even though those who made the flag for a symbol of the Israeli state were evil people..." [21]

Anti-Zionism does not translate to personal antagonism, and Rabbi Chaim Shmuelevitz, the Mirrer rosh yeshiva, openly displayed thanks to soldiers of the Israeli army.

While they do not say prayers for the State of Israel, and are ideologically opposed to Zionism, the Ger, Vizhnitz and Belz Hasidic groups do vote in the Israeli elections, and Ger mildly opposes withdrawals from the occupied territories. Ger and Belz are two of the most influential movements behind the Israeli political party Agudat Yisrael, which together with the Litvishe Degel HaTorah, forms United Torah Judaism.

In a similar vein, Klausenberg maintains an anti-Zionist stance but accepts funding from the Israeli government (when available) for its institutions.

The fifth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Sholom Dovber Schneersohn (1860-1920), also known as the RaShaB, published Kuntre Uma'ayan, the beginning of which contains a strong polemic against Zionism. The seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe, however, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, expressed overwhelming support for the State's military endeavors, and vehemently condemned any transfers of land as against Jewish law. His reasoning, was based on the code of Jewish law, the Shulchan Aruch [22] which states that the Sabbath must be violated (carrying weapons) by the residents of a Jewish community (in any country) that borders a hostile gentile settlement, even if they are threatened in the most subtle manner. He viewed the whole of Israel as such a community and that was the impetus for his support. He argued that the safety of the Jewish people was paramount, and the physical presence of so many Jews in the land meant that its borders had to be protected as a matter of course. Nonetheless, he also drew support for his statements from the notion in the Torah that the land of Israel was given to the Jewish people, and that inherent Jewish ownership of the land could not be superseded by mere political interests. Nonetheless, he refused to call the state by name, claiming that the holy land exists independent of any authority that sees itself as sovereign over the land. He further criticized feelings of nationalism connected to the State of Israel, saying that the only thing that unites Jews is the Torah, not a secular state that happens to be planted on holy land.[23]

Since most of the Chabadniks in the world live in Israel, there are a great deal of Chabad houses there. The majority of Chabadniks differ from the rest of the Hassidim by not only speaking Hebrew conversationally, but also speaking it in the Modern Israeli way, and not the traditional Asheknazic way. In 2009, Chabad Rabbis endorsed the Zionist, Jewish-based Israeli political party Ichud Leumi in the elections.

The main Haredi newspapers, Hamodia, HaMachane HaHaredi and Yated Neeman, occasionally publish articles strongly criticizing Zionism, naming it a "heretical movement". They sometimes refer to the country as "Israel", and at other times will only refer to the geographical entity as "Eretz Yisroel". The Israel news columns are almost exclusively right of centre, lambasting Arab terrorism. Articles about outreach movements in Israel and Israeli culture are very common, and are shown without ideological bias.

The Hardal community is a community of religious Zionists who accept many Haredi practices, such as stricter modesty in dress and restrictions on secular studies. Hardal is an acronym for Haredi Dati Leumi. Dati Leumi refers to religious Jews who are Zionists.

Shas is the dominant umbrella organization and political party among Sephardi Haredim and represents an overwhelming majority of the Sephardi Haredi population. In 2010 Shas joined the World Zionist Organisation and became the first officially Zionist Haredi political party. According to Shas MK Yaakov Margi, Shas has long operated as a Zionist party: "There's nothing earth-shaking about saying Shas is a Zionist party. We operate as such, we join governments and are partners in the Zionist experience, (our members) serve in the army. There's nothing new here."[24]

Several books on the issue of Zionism were written by different rabbis.

Vayoel Moshe was written by the Satmar Rebbe, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum (1887-1979). It consists of three parts: Maamar Shalosh Shevuos (three oaths), Maamar Yishuv Eretz Yisroel (settling the Land of Israel), and Maamar Loshon HaKodesh (the holy tongue). The first part, which is the main part of the book, discusses the three oaths mentioned in Ketubot 111a - that the Jewish people are not allowed to ascend to Eretz Yisrael by force, that the Jewish people are not allowed to rebel against the nations of the world, and that the Jewish people may not by their sins delay the coming of Moshiach, the Jewish messiah. It is primarily a book of Halacha (Jewish law). Rabbi Teitelbaum refers to Religious Zionism as a major desecration of G-d's name, blames Zionism for the Holocaust, and refers to Zionist leaders such as Theodor Herzl as "heretics".

Also written by the Satmar Rebbe, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, this small book consists of inspirational polemics against Zionism. He wrote it in 1967 as a rebuttal to those who said that the Six Day War was a divine miracle that showed God's support for the State of Israel, saying instead it was a test from God to see whether we would follow the Torah or be led astray by miracles which seemed to support Zionism in the eyes of the masses. He compared this to the miracles that are often done by idolaters in support of their religions, inasmuch as Judaism is not based on miracles, but rather the national revelation on Sinai.

Eim HaBanim Semeicha was written by Rabbi Yisachar Shlomo Teichtal, and published in 1943. Teichtal grew up as a staunch anti-Zionist Chasid of the Munkatsher Rebbe. However, during the Holocaust, Rabbi Teichtal changed his position from the one he espoused in his youth. The physical product of that introspection is the book, Eim HaBanim Semeicha, in which he specifically retracts his previous viewpoints, and argues that the true redemption can only come if the Jewish people unite and rebuild the land of Israel.[25] Many of his coreligionists viewed the book with skepticism, some going so far as to ban Rabbi Teichtal from their synagogues.[26]

In the book, Rabbi Teichtal strongly criticizes the Haredim for not supporting the Zionist movement. When it was written, it was a scathing criticism of the Jewish Orthodox establishment, and Agudat Israel in particular.

He writes:

Among Haredi anti-Zionist movements, opinions differ on what attitude to take now that de facto a state exists. Some movements remained actively anti-Zionist, while others lowered their voice; some refuse to vote, while others do vote; some accept money from the government, while others will not.

Many Hasidic Rebbes with followers in the land of Israel, including the Gerrer Rebbe, the Belzer Rebbe, the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, and others have encouraged their followers to vote in Israeli elections.[27][28] Lubavitcher Hasidim are encouraged to join the Israeli Defense Forces, in order to ensure the state's security (inasmuch as the State's security is inextricably entwined with the safety of the Jewish people who live within its borders).

Meanwhile, the Edah HaChareidis Rabbinical Council of Jerusalem and its associated communities, including Satmar, Dushinsky, Toldos Aharon and Toldos Avrohom Yitzchok, do not vote and do not accept government money. Around election days, posters by the Edah HaChareidis are posted throughout Haredi neighborhoods of Jerusalem proclaiming that it is forbidden to vote in the elections, and that doing so is a grave sin. The Edah HaChareidis and its affiliated movements have permitted cooperating with the Israeli police under extenuating circumstances.[29]

View post:
Haredim and Zionism | Religion-wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Haredim and Zionism | Religion-wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia
Tags:

Posted By admin on January 6, 2019

What is the ADL Next Generation Philanthropy Community?

The ADL Next Generation Philanthropy Community (NextGen) unites the next generation of philanthropic leaders committed to the mission of ADL to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and secure justice and fair treatment to all.

NextGen connects individuals ages 22 40 with meaningful opportunities to contribute and advocate for the activities and programs of ADL. NextGen empowers young philanthropists to become ambassadors for ADL through a broad range of educational, community service, philanthropic and leadership programs and events.

What are theADL Next Generation Outreach Networks?

The Next Generation Philanthropy Community Outreach Network (NextGen ON) provides personal, intimate opportunities for NextGen leaders to connect their friends and neighbors to learn about and become engaged with the mission and work of ADL in the New York Region. This model is inspired by the original Outreach Network created in Chicago.

The goals are to:

NGPC ON hosts events with ADL experts, individuals who have been impacted by ADLs work and/or other experts within areas of focus for ADL in accessible environments. These events can be held on any day of the week and in a variety of formats, including but not limited to breakfasts, lunches, wine tastings, Shabbat dinners, sports outings, and the like. The format of the events is intended to balance an opportunity to learn about ADL from experts within the fields of focus for ADL with the social and networking aspects of involvement in NextGen.

What are the Next Generation Leadership Opportunities?

Glass LeadershipInstitute

The Anti-Defamation League Glass Leadership Institute (GLI) is a nationally recognized leadership development program for a select group of young professionals. GLI provides an up-close and personal opportunity to expand their knowledge of ADL and its mission. Founded in 1997 in Orange County, California as the Steinberg Leadership Institute, it was later endowed by Sherwin and Shirley Glass of Atlanta, Georgia in honor and memory of their daughter, Shana, and renamed the Glass Leadership Institute. Today, GLI is now in 24 regions and has engaged over 3,700 individuals who are knowledgeable about ADLs work, committed to ensuring the organizations vitality and effectively advocatingthe mission of ADL to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and secure justice and fair treatment to all.

GLI participants engage in nine months of dynamic, interactive sessions on a broad range of ADL topics. The culmination of GLI is the annual Shana Amy Glass National Leadership Conference in Washington DC where participants have the opportunity to hear from national ADL leaders and partners from leading civil rights and human relations organizations as well as meet with legislators on Capitol Hill to advocate on behalf of ADL. The National Leadership Conference is attended by hundreds of participants and ADL leaders from across the country. ADL invests over $2,500 in each participant to take part in National Leadership Conference, monthly sessions and regional events.

Click here or more information about the Glass Leadership Institute.

Applications now open for the 2018-2019 ClassAPPLY TODAY

NextGen Leadership Board

The NextGen Executive Board is the governing and leadership of the New York Regions young philanthropic fundraising, programming and special events.The structure of the NextGen Executive Board is: 1) Executive Cabinet (Co-Chairs and Committee Chairs) and 2) General Members.NextGen Leadership Board

The NextGenExecutive Board is made up of the leaders of NextGens fundraising, programming and special events. The Committee Chairs are responsible for leading the NextGenGeneral Board members in setting and achieving goals that will enhance the mission of the Next Generation Philanthropy Community to unite the next generation of philanthropic leaders committed to the mission of ADL to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and secure justice and fair treatment for all.

What are the Next Generation Philanthropy Giving Levels and Benefits?

NextGenis the founding emerging philanthropic division of ADL in New York City. Originally founded in 2002, NextGenhas attracted over 3,700 emerging philanthropists and has raised over $1 million for ADLs work in New York City. By joining NextGen, you will be a part of a strong tradition of the next generation securing justice and fair treatment to all. NextGenis a wonderful opportunity for dynamic young leaders who are dedicated to ADLs mission to also network and connect with their peers in fun and impactful ways.

As a NextGen Supporter, you can begin your philanthropic journey with ADL today that will lead you into the future. The level of giving and benefits of NextGenare:

Activist: $2,500Ambassadorplus:

Ambassador: $1,000Advocate plus:

Advocate: $360

How do I get involved with the Next Generation Philanthropy Community?

To get involved with NextGen, contact Stephanie Fletcher at sfletcher@adl.org or 212-885-5805.

Read more here:
Anti-Defamation League | Next Generation Philanthropy ...

Category: Anti-Defamation League | Comments Off on Anti-Defamation League | Next Generation Philanthropy …
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 30, 2018

A Lack of Originality

One thing that characterizes dogmatists is a lack of originality. You buy into the dogma and thats it. Your worldview is completeand so are your rationalizations, defensive pronouncements and complaints.

I have been an opponent of the Zionist dogma for almost fifty years (wow!) because it (1) denies Palestinians their civil and communal rights; (2) corrupts many Jews with a siren song of racially based nationalism; (3) undermines the concepts of international law and human rights and (4) seduces the U.S. government into supporting Zionist ethnic nationalist ambitions.

During the last twenty years I have noticed that the arguments used by the Zionists to defend their policies and practices have been quite consistent. This cant be because they are convincing, since they are clearly losing the battle for public opinion. It may be that being a dogmatist simply robs you of any originality and flexibility.

Recently I was again struck by this consistency when I read a brief piece published on 12 December 2018 in theNew York Times(NYT)by David Harris, chief executive officer of American Jewish Committee. The piece, entitledWhy Anti-Zionism Is Malign(malign here meaning malevolent) was written in reaction to an earlier (7 December 2018)NYTeditorial column by Michelle Goldberg entitledAnti-Zionism Is Not Anti-Semitism.

The Harris piece lays out some of the basic Zionist arguments in defense of Israel and their complaints about opposition positions. That being so, I thought it presented a good opportunity to briefly run through these points and, not for the first time or the last, debunk each in turn. So here goes.

Arguments and Counter-Arguments

Argument One: Anti-Zionists are really anti-Semites.

For anyone with an accurate historical view of anti-Zionism and an accurate definition of historical anti-Semitism, Harriss assertion is hard to understand. From the historical perspective it is comparing apples and oranges. The only way to merge the two is by realigning reality.

Zionism is a political dogma that insists on an exclusively Jewish state in Palestine. It operates like a political party line. Anti-Semitism is the age-old prejudice against Jews as Jews. The way the Zionists attempt to realign the world so that the two different concepts merge is by making the false claim that the State of Israel represents every Jew on the planet. If you buy into that claim, it seems to follow that anyone who is critical of Israel must also be critical of Jews per se.

In her December 7 column Michelle Goldberg called this proposition into question when she noted that Theres a long history of Jewish anti-Zionism or non-Zionism, both secular and religious, and this testifies to the fact that its entirely possible to oppose Jewish ethno-nationalism without being a bigot. Harris and his committee claimed to be outraged by this fact-based claim.

And what are we to make of the following point, also noted by Ms. Goldberg? If many Jews do not support Zionism or Israel,there are a number of anti-Semites who do. And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is courting themas potential allies.The case may be that to take up the cause of ethnic nationalism you have to be a bigot.

Argument Two: To deny the Jewish people, of all the peoples on earth, the right to self-determination surely is discriminatory.

One big problem here: many anti-Zionists do not actually deny Jews of the right of self-determination. What they really stipulate is that the Jews (or any other people) should not realize self-determination through racist policies, that in this case, deny another people (the Palestinians) of self-determination.This is one of the Zionists moral blindspotsthe inability to see, or care about, the real consequences of their actions and ends. The use of the phrase of all peoples on earth implies a sense of exceptionalism that (as in so many other cases past and present) excuses all manner of crimes through the process of special pleading.

Argument Three: To single out Israel, the only liberal democracy in the Middle East, for demonization and isolation, while ignoring egregious human rights violators aplenty, once again smacks of anti-Jewish hatred.

There are three parts to this claim: (1) that Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East; (2) that it is being singled out for demonization and isolation while others are ignored; and (3) this process must be an expression of anti-Jewish hatred. Basically, there is a lot of whining going on here.

Alas, Israel is not a liberal democracy. It has always been the case that its ideologically driven aim is to give full political and civil rights to Israeli Jews only, and to this end it has used democratic facades to hide the truth. As a consequence, Israel has worked itself into anapartheid state statusan apartheid is a crime against humanity under international law.

The belated realization of this fact by liberal Zionists has created a lot of angst. If liberal Jews are increasingly alienated by Israeli behavior, just how liberal can that country be?

As to the use of the term demonization: it simply does not apply. The bases for criticizing Israel are drawn from the standards of International law and the universal declaration of human rights. There is no wild mud slinging here. The charges of Israeli racism are fact based.

To complain that those critical of Israel arent equally critical of others reminds one of the little kid who, when caught being really bad says, Hey, what about those other guys? As if catching him in the act, while not simultaneously chasing after others, somehow taints the accusation that the kid is a delinquent.

There is also the fact that if anti-Zionists appear to treat Israel differently, it is because the Zionist state has earned its special place of blame. How so? Agents of the Zionist state have worked for decades, and all too successfully, to arrange U.S. and other Western support of racist and illegal expansionist Israeli policies and practices. As Michelle Goldberg again suggests, the result is the corruption of fundamental American [and other Western] values and, one might add, the waste of billions of dollars in tax-payer money. That being the case, the Zionists deserve special scrutiny.

Argument Four: The Israelis have always wanted peace. However, their efforts to forge a peace deal with the Palestinians have been spurned time and again for over 70 years.

This is an ideologically skewed version of the peace process. It is, of course, true that both parties have made repeated peace proposals. However, those made by Israel would have always resulted in an unsustainable Palestinian mini-state, essentially disarmed, economically under the thumb of Israel, and open to incursions by its powerful and paranoid neighbor. This might appear to Zionists such as David Harris as a good faith effort at peacehis questionable view of reality could make it seem that waybut no Palestinian could agree to what would be a surrender of their national rights.

Conclusion

Zionist presentations of their case, at least to the general public, almost always come in the form of knee-jerk reactions to various forms of criticism. This was certainly the case of David Harriss presentation, written out of outrage at the rather mild criticism of Zionist positions offered by Michelle Goldberg (herself Jewish).

Harris offers no new ideas, no compromises, and certainly no mea culpas. Under the circumstances the confused and uncertain reader might approach the seeming impasse of argument and counter-argument this way: it is perhaps not an issue of what is real. Dogmatists of every sort have a hard time assessing objective reality. It is more a question of what sort of a world do we want to be real? Are the notions of international law and human rights a better or worst basis for our world than ethnocentric nationalism and religious exclusivity? We know the Zionist answer to this question and just how sensitive they are to any challenges. What then is your preference?

Read the original here:
Zionism and Anti-Semitism: Argument / Counter-Argument

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Zionism and Anti-Semitism: Argument / Counter-Argument
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 26, 2018

The rules and lifestyle of Hasidic Jews seem mysterious. They adhere to strict beliefs and practices that appear complex. This guide will briefly explain the basics of their ultra-orthodox culture. It will outline some fundamental facts, and it will answer a few common questions.

Although the Jewish religion is over 2500 years old, Ultra Orthodox Hasidic culture began only around 250 years ago - in Eastern Europe. A new movement was introduced that emphasized physical activity (example: dancing) over studying text (example: reading Talmudic books). This movement had a heightened fraternal nature to it - participants formed extremely close-knit communities that centered around a grand rabbi leader (known as a 'Rebbe'). The movement survived through oppression, mass emigration and the Holocaust and is now located mainly in the USA and Israel. However, Hasidic Jewish community affiliations are based on the town or city where their families lived in Europe. There are dozens of sects - corresponding to various places of origin. For example, one of the largest sects is 'Satmar' - named for the city of Satu Mare in Romania.

The fundamental principle of Hasidic Jewish beliefs and practices is: "change nothing." The way that everything was back in Europe is how it should continue perpetually. This applies to language, clothing, food and every other aspect of their lifestyle. Yiddish is the default language. Yiddish is a unique language whose basis is German mixed with Polish, Russian, Hebrew, and English. Gender roles are traditional, and genders are kept separated almost all of the time (in school, synagogue, etc). Marriages are arranged, usually at age 17, 18 or 19. The Hasidic community is very fraternal - men and boys spend a significant amount of time in the synagogue together. Often they will also participate in feast gatherings with the Rebbe which entail joyous singing & dancing. The Rebbe is the absolute leader of the sect and he will rule on all religious beliefs and practices. Physical modesty is paramount - bodies must be covered fully and all clothing is formal.

Hasidic Jewish men are known for wearing long black frock coats and hats. This was the fashion among nobility in Poland, Ukraine etc. in the 18th/19th Century. The fur hat that is worn on Sabbath (Saturday) and holidays is called a 'streimel.' This hat can cost as much as $1000!

Hassidic Jewish women follow strict rules of modesty. Skirts hang below the knees and sleeves extend past the elbows. When a woman gets married the rule is that she must always keep her hair covered. Typically she will wear a wig that resembles real hair. Some Hasidic women shave their heads, which are covered when they are out in public. The reason for this is that they are taking the rules of modesty to the most extreme - if she has no hair, then it won't be possible for a man to see it.

Hasidic Jewish people are known for having large families. 6-10 children is typical, and sometimes they have as many as 15 or more! This is another practice: reproduce as much as possible. It is considered a top rule which was commanded directly from god. This is the reason that even though some sects were nearly wiped out in the Holocaust, there are now communities packed with tens of thousands of people! And this is the reason that Hasidic neighborhoods are loaded with small children and school buses.

Saturday is the holy day of the week. The agenda is to relax with family and spend time worshiping. Prayers are always 3 times per day - on Shabbos each prayer session is longer. The defining rule of Sabbos is that 'work' is prohibited. The interpretation of this extends overwhelmingly over almost every aspect of daily life. Activities that are prohibited include driving, using any electric device, cooking or handling currency. A Jewish person is not even allowed to carry any object outside of their home. All Hasidic ultra orthodox rules apply to Jewish people only - people who are not Jewish are not required to follow these customs or prohibitions. This is the reason that occasionally Hasidic Jewish people will ask a non-Jewish person to perform a basic task for them - such as turning on a light, turning on an air conditioner, etc.

Hasidic Jews have more than 8 different holidays that they practice. Here are the main holidays which are the most openly visible in an ultra orthodox neighborhood:

Sukkos

Sukkos is a 7 day holiday in autumn. It is celebrating the redemption of the Ancient Israelite Jews from Egypt. The main practice is to build a temporary hut called a 'sukkah' outside of the home. The purpose it to reminisce about the 40 years wandering in the desert, where the Jews had no permanent shelter and were protected by god. The sukkah must have a wooden roof which is partially open to the sky. The rule is that all meals must be eaten in the sukkah, and some Hasidic Jews with more stringent beliefs will study in it or even sleep in it.

Pesach aka 'Passover'

Pesach is an 8 day holiday in spring. It is also celebrating the Jewish redemption from Ancient Egypt. The main practice is to refrain from consuming any wheat and wheat-based products. A Hasidic Jew must purge them from his or her possession, too. The purpose for this rule is to commemorate the following: God hurried the Jews out of Egypt so quickly that the dough they were preparing to eat did not have time to rise and become bread. While they were leaving the dough baked in the hot sun and wound up as a thin loaf called 'matzah.' The rule on Pesach is that matzah is used as a substitute for bread or for any wheat-based product. There are 2 long feasts each called a 'seder.' The name 'Passover ' comes from the fact that God killed the first-born son of every Egyptian, but God 'passed over' the homes of all faithful Jews.

Purim

Purim is a joyful Jewish holiday in spring. It is celebrating how in Ancient Persia a plot to eradicate the Jewish race was thwarted by God through a series of small coincidences. The main practice is to celebrate festively by getting drunk on alcohol. The other main practice is to masquerade in costume. The whole day is a big party where food gifts are exchanged and charity is given.

Enjoyed this guide? Make a charity donation

This guide is provided for free. To show appreciation, please donate to the following nonprofit agency which provides food to needy people in Brooklyn: Masbia Soup Kitchen Network. Your donation will support 3 kitchen facilities, nutritional care packages and more. Thank you in advance!

Original post:

Hasidic Jewish Rules - Ultra Orthodox Beliefs & Practices

Category: Hasidic | Comments Off on Hasidic Jewish Rules – Ultra Orthodox Beliefs & Practices
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 24, 2018

Dr. Devin Naar, Sephardic Studies Program Chair & Isaac Alhadeff Professor of Sephardic Studies

Dr. Devin E. Naar is the Isaac Alhadeff Professor in Sephardic Studies, Associate Professor of History, and faculty at the Stroum Center for Jewish Studies in the Jackson School of International Studies at the University of Washington. Born and raised in New Jersey, Dr. Naar graduated summa cum laude from Washington University in St. Louis and received his Ph.D. in History at Stanford University. His forthcoming book with Stanford University Press, Jewish Salonica: Between the Ottoman Empire and Modern Greece, based on his prize-winning dissertation, explores the impact of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of modern Greece during the 19th and 20th centuries on the Jews of Salonica (Thessaloniki).

In recognition of the contributions he has already made to the study of Sephardic history, Dr. Naar was recently elected to the Academic Advisory Council of the Center for Jewish History in New York. He is the only assistant professor to receive this prestigious post, where he will represent the American Sephardic Federation.

Read more about Professor Naar at his Jewish Studies faculty page.

Our program is deeply grateful for the support of the Sephardic Studies Founders Circle:

Excerpt from:

Sephardic Studies - UW Stroum Center for Jewish Studies

Category: Sephardic | Comments Off on Sephardic Studies – UW Stroum Center for Jewish Studies
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 23, 2018

net/publication/271769630

Rethinking Mizrahim: Examining Neo-Zionism and Mizrahi Studies

Article April 2014

CITATIONS READS0 96

1 author:

Zachary SmithSOAS, University of London7 PUBLICATIONS0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zachary Smith on 03 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.Rethinking Mizraim: Examining Neo-Zionism and Mizrai Studies

Zachary Smith

22 April 2014Smith 2

Introduction

This paper seeks to examine and deconstruct two groups and the relationships between

them: the Israeli national-religious settler movement and the Israeli Jews of Middle Eastern and

North African descent, or mizraim. In academic, journalistic and popular literature, these groups

are rarely placed in the same discursive space. Rather, they frequently find themselves

implicated at divergent ends of the relationships of power that define the Israeli Jewish polity

and socioeconomic structures. How has the image of the settler as white, ashkenazi, middle-

class, religiously and ideologically driven been produced? Conversely, how has the critical

scholarship on mizraim in Israel, which locates mizraim both spatially and economically at the

periphery of Israeli Jewish society, constructed an imagined mizrai subject with no relationship

to the image of the settler above? This essay will seek to understand the real overlap between

these two contrasting pictures and discuss the participation of mizraim in the neo-Zionist

project. While these questions demand a much fuller theoretical discussion than this short piece

will be able to detail, I seek to propose in this paper a new way of thinking mizraim and neo-

Zionists, and, by extension, mizrai participation in and reproduction of ashkenazi hegemony.

In exploring these topics, this essay will begin by briefly outlining two fields of inquiry.

The first is critical scholarship on mizraim and the socio-spatial periphery of Israel, especially

highlighting areas in which theoretical and practical gaps exist that contribute to the production

of the mizrai individual as disconnected from the settlement enterprise. The second is a

discussion of neo-Zionism, bringing to the fore the image of the ideologically motivated settler

as ashkenazi and middle-class, from the geographic and economic core of Israel. In doing so, it

will consider the national-religious group Gush Emunim (Bloc of the Faithful) and its successors

juxtaposed with the practical reasons behind settlers presence in the occupied territories. Finally,Smith 3

this paper will conclude with a larger attempt at outlining the potential participation of mizraim

in the neo-Zionist movement and as a part of neo-Zionist ideological frameworks.

Mizrahim and Critical Mizrahi Studies

Critical studies of mizraim have centred on the lasting effects of the absorption-

modernisation policy on the new immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

Scholars have documented these groups as the Jewish victims of Zionism,1 deconstructed the

societal dichotomy of Arab and Jew through the figure of the mizrai,2 critiqued the stereotype

of mizraim as traditional,3 and situated them on the socio-spatial periphery of the Jewish state.4

Academics have struggled to define this group, situated in the third space between the affluent

Ashkenazi elite and the dispossessed indigenous Palestinians,5 as they are alternately referred to

as Sephardim, Arab-Jews, mizraim and Jews of MENA descent. This paper will settle on the

term mizraim, which resists opposing tendencies to divide this group and links to their struggle

against marginalisation and discrimination.6 The mizrai struggle against forced settlement in

development towns and assimilation into a quasi-European Hebrew culture while demanding

equality with ashkenazi elites is real, from the 1959 Wadi Salib riots, to the 1970s Black Panther

movement, to current efforts for integrated schooling and political rights led by the Mizrahi

Democratic Rainbow.7 What is missing from this narrative is any sense of mizrai agency

outside of the struggle against ashkenazi oppression, any understanding of active mizrai

participation in the Zionist project. While this paper will not engage with the history of

1Shohat (1988).2Shenhav (2006).3Shafir and Peled (2002).4Yiftachel (2000); Shohat (1999).5Bhabha (1994).6Chetrit (2009); Goldberg and Bram (2007).7Chetrit (2009).Smith 4

discrimination against mizraim, this section will explore how this history has constructed an

image of the mizrai with no relation to the Zionist settlement project.

The location and history of mizrai communities has considerable implications for

consideration of Israel as a democracy, liberal or otherwise. Sociologist Sammy Smooha has

argued that Israel fits the ethnic democracy model, in particular emphasising the state

preference for the Jewish ethnie and lack of full rights for the Arab minority.8 Smoohas model,

however, generally ignores the systemic stratification between ashkenazi and mizrai

communities, to say nothing of former Soviet Union and Ethiopian immigrants. Differentiations

within Jewish society between various ethnic groupshave a great impact on the character of

Israeli regime and especially on democracy.9 In contrast, Oren Yiftachels ethnocracy model

draws on a broader range of case studies in developing ethnocratic theory and applying it to the

Israeli case. Ethnocracies are regimes premised on a main project of ethnonational expansion

and control and on a parallel self-representation of the system as democratic and are stratified

not only by ethnonational group (Jewish-Arab) but by ethnoclasses (ashkenazi-mizrahi).10

Ethnocracies are both non-authoritarian because of the granting of significant civil-political

rights to ethnonational minorities and non-democratic because of the rupturing of the demos

the seizure of the state by one ethnonational group.11 I do not take issue with Yiftachels

characterisation of the Israeli polity and state; indeed, I very much agree with his critique of

Smooha.12 Rather, I am struck by his lack of engagement with the other half of the data he

presents on mizraim.

8Smooha (2002).9Jamal (2002), 414.10Yiftachel (2006), 5.11ibid., 32.12Ganim, Rouhana and Yiftachel (1998).Smith 5

Yiftachel situates mizraim, both in Ethnocracy and in scholarly articles, both on the

spatial and political periphery of the Israeli state and as a trapped ethnoclass between ashkenazi

elites and the Palestinian ethnonational minority. This builds on Bhabas conception of third

space in that an ethnoclass in entrapment also faces significant obstacles in their mobilisation

against endemic marginalisation.13 Mizraim are trapped by Zionism in that even as European-

led Zionism marginalises mizrai communities, the communities themselves have come to

terms with, and even sustained, the Zionist settlement project that marginalized them in Israeli

society.14 In recognising this, Yiftachel seems to approach a dual understanding of mizraim as

both victimised by and continuously reifying Zionist ideology. Yet, in mapping the location of

mizrai-dominated development towns on Israels frontiers, development towns situated in the

occupied West Bank are characterised as towns, not settlements.15 This is deeply confusing:

why are mizraim allowed to be settled in towns but not actively settle the frontier themselves?

The confusion extends further when considering Yiftachels documentation of mizrai social

distance/closeness with regard to other groups in Israeli society. Mizraim of both the first and

second generation feel neither particularly close nor distant towards settlers in the West Bank,

but feel very distant towards both Palestinian citizens of Israel and Palestinians in the occupied

territories.16 Ninety-five percent of mizraim identify as Zionists. The internalisation of

ethnocratic logic among mizraim, in short, seems very strong. In this sense, even as the

marginalisation of mizraim continues, it is not surprising that mizaim can also be found in

13Bhabha (1994).14Yiftachel (2006), 211.15Dalsheim (2008).16See Figure 9.3 in Yiftachel (2006), 222.Smith 6

significant numbers in settlements like Ariel and Maale Adumim, active agents in the neo-

Zionist settlement project.17

Before discussing neo-Zionism and the settlement of the occupied territories more

directly, I want to offer a few questions that could help frame an understanding of how the image

of the mizrai is produced. First, given the mizrai presence in development towns, and these

See original here:
Rethinking Mizra Him | Zionism | Jews - scribd.com

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Rethinking Mizra Him | Zionism | Jews – scribd.com
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 23, 2018

I didnt want to write about this. I dont want to write about this. But circumstances give me little choice. The ancient poison has been spreading, and the last major pogrom (this one industrialized) ended 73 years ago. The pogrom cycle is coming around again.

Most people, thankfully, are no longer susceptible to the poison. But others still are, and they are being openly encouraged. I cant be sure how much this article will help, but neither can I watch in silence. I wont.

Let me start by being very clear on a handful of basics:

Israel is a state, a violence-based hierarchy like every other state. It has done and will continue to do immoral things. Thats what all states do. To focus solely on Israel is to distort reality for a separate purpose.

Zionism had a reason has a reason. To portray it as some kind of signature evil to use the term as an all-purpose condemnation is not based on reason or justice; its based on uglier things. And let me doubly clear: I am not a Zionist myself, but neither am I blind to the reasons for Zionism.

Jews come in all flavors: A few are saints, a few are sinners, and most are in between. Just like every other group you can point to.

Stories of Jewish conspiracies are vile fantasies. Do Jews sometimes do favors for other Jews? Sure, just like the Irish sometimes do favors for other Irishmen, Italians for other Italians, and so on. But no more than that. Ive been in positions to know, and there was simply nothing there. But reality doesnt matter in this area; those who crave such stories will grab them regardless.

Being anti-Jew is an obsessive disorder. Such people have a compulsion to accuse Jews. Thats why they cling to terms like Zionist, Zio, the Chosen, the Tribe, and now (((the triple parentheses))). They have a psychological need to say Jews whether directly or through code words. Some of them troll the internet looking for opportunities.

Now Ill get to some details.

Individual Israelis are no more responsible for the actions of the Israeli government than individual Americans are culpable for Abu Ghraib. Governments force people to pay for their crimes, and the government of Israel is no exception. And to pretend that Jews in general are somehow responsible for the actions of the Israeli government runs toward madness.

The actions of the Israeli government are front-page news everywhere and at all times. That is fully out of touch with reality. In truth, its the result of a propaganda war that the Israelis are losing badly.

Again, this is obsessive. Israel is less than 1% the size of Arab-held lands, and yet they are portrayed as the biggest, nastiest bully ever seen in the Middle East. And whatever the evils of the Israelis, I think they pale compared to large-scale honor killings, genital mutilations, and death sentences upon people who change religions. And yet, those stories are seen approximately never on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc.

Consider also that the Israelis have made multiple and substantive peace overtures to the Palestinians, while the Hamas Charter openly calls for Israels destruction.

Israel is a barely visible spec on a world map and is projecting military power almost nowhere beyond its own tiny borders. And contrary to what you may have heard, Israels military budget is less than one-third of Saudi Arabias. Likewise, while Israel does get considerable US military financing, Egypt gets more.

These days, however, facts seldom get in the way of a flamboyant story.

And please remember that 1.6 million Arabs are legal citizens and legal voters in Israel. I encourage you to discover how many Jews are legal citizens and/or legal voters in Jordan, Arabia, and so on.

The Jews were ejected from Judea, their long-time homeland, in stages, but mainly in 70 AD and 132 AD. Ever since, theyve been repetitively beaten, robbed, killed, expelled in mass, shut up in ghettos, and denied recourse for their grievances. This has continued for almost 2,000 years. Can any sane person not understand their desire for a safe place?

That is what Zionism is about.

Jews tried all kinds of strategies to cope with their endless abuse. None of them worked long term. Thats how Israel became the solution.

And by the way, Zionists purchased their land from the Arabs, until they were attacked for it.

What confuses people about the Jews is that they are a religion and a people, even a nation, with or without the state of Israel. But thats not unique. The Basques, for example, have been both a people and a nation for a long, long time, whether or not they had a state.

In any event, the Hebrews and the Jews (the same folks, though I draw a line between the two designations in the 6th century BC) have been hated throughout history. They were hated at 2500 BC, they were hated at 500 BC and 500 AD and 1500 AD, and theyre sometimes hated now.

Theyve been hated for lots of reasons of course, but a major component of it was that they made other people, and especially sacrifice collectors, look bad. And making such people look bad is a dangerous line of work.

So, how did they anger the sacrifice collectors? Well, thats something the Jews have inadvertently specialized in. Here are the primary ways:

They developed belief in a god that dealt with individuals rather than collectives. (City-states being the primary collectives at the time.) That was contrary to the rationale of sacrifice for Sumerians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans.

Making matters worse, the Jews described a god who listened to and spoke to the humble and who turned his back to the mighty. Again, that disrupted the ruling rationale of the empires.

Making things still worse, the Jews placed justice above the ruler, another intolerable demotion of the big man, who demanded to be justice personified.

Because of these three offenses, the Hebrews and Jews were generally pushed out of polite company and forced to live on the peripheries. And from that they learned to think and operate as outsiders: separate from enforced hierarchies and collectives. That, to the sacrifice collectors, turned the Jews into a potentially deadly virus.

On top of that, Jews always majored on morality, which meant that theyd consistently show the world a humane outside, something that shouldnt exist according to the legends of the nations.

Rather than going on, Ill close with a single line from Eric Hoffers The Passionate State of Mind. You can provide your own commentary:

There are many who find a good alibi far more attractive than an achievement.

* * * * *

As it turns out, history was never too hard to understand; they just told you the wrong story.

Comments from readers:

This is the most amazing little book I have read on history in 36 years of reading history.

It will change the way you look at nearly everything.

I will flat out say that this is the best history book I have ever read I am fairly well read, but I learned a tremendous amount that I hadnt known before or hadnt aligned so that it made sense.

This is the best and clearest description of the history of Western civilization I have ever read.

Packed with insights on every page concerning how the world came to be the way it is and what we might expect in the future.

Get it at Amazon or on Kindle.

* * * * *

Paul Rosenbergwww.freemansperspective.com

Continued here:
Israel, Zionism, and the (((Jews)))

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Israel, Zionism, and the (((Jews)))
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 23, 2018

sionismo (es); Zonismi (is); Zionisme (ms); (ps); (bg); Sionism (ro); (ur); Sionizmus (sk); (uk); Sionismu (sc); Sionizm (uz); Sionisma (fo); cionismo (eo); (mk); Cionizam (bs); Sionismo (an); (tyv); sionisme (fr); Zionisme (jv); Cionizam (hr); (yi); (mr); Ch ngha phc quc Do Thi (vi); Cionisms (lv); (sr); Zionism (sco); Sek-an-ch-g (nan); Sionisme (nb); Sionizm (az); (ckb); Zionism (en); (ar); Sionouriezh (br); (yue); Cionizmus (hu); Sionismo (eu); Sionismu (ast); sionisme (ca); Zionizmo (lad); Zionismus (de); (bn); (be); (hy); (zh); Zionisme (da); (ka); (ja); Sionisme (nn); (ko); (arz); Zionisme (id); (he); Sionismus (la); Sionismi (fi); (hi); Siyonzm (ku); Sionismo (mwl); Siyonisse (wa); Sionisme (lfn); Sionism (sv); (ta); sionismo (it); zionisme (nl); Sionism (et); Sionisme (oc); (be-tarask); Siyonismo (ceb); (th); Siyonizm (tr); sionismus (cs); Seionaght (gv); sionismo (pt); cionizam (sr-el); Cionizmi (sq); Seioniaeth (cy); (ru); Sionizmas (lt); Sionizem (sl); zionismo (tl); (fa); (mzn); Sionismo (war); Syjonizm (pl); (ml); Cionizam (sh); (sr-ec); (sah); Sionism (pms); Zionismus (gsw); Sionismo (gl); (kk); (el); Siyonizm (diq) Movimiento poltico judo (es); politick ideov hnutie (sk); - (he); ideologie betreffende Joods-nationalisme (nl); Luta do povo judeu pelas terras de Israel (pt); movement that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel (en); (fa); (ar); movimento politico (it) Zionismo, Sionistas, Sionista, Movimiento sionista (es); Cionista (hu); Sonismi (is); Zionism, Zionis (ms); Zionisten, Zionist, Zionistisch (de); (be); , , , (fa); (bg); Zionismen (da); Siyonist, Sionizm, Siyonculuk (tr); , , , , , (ja); Sionist, Zionism, Sionismen, Sionistisk (sv); (uk); Siionisti, Siionismi, Sionisti (fi); Cionisma, Cionisto (eo); sionizmus, sionista (cs); (ta); Sionista, Sionisti, Movimento sionista (it); Sionnisme, Sionisme politique, Nation juive, Sionistes, Mouvement sioniste, Sioniste, Nationalisme juif (fr); Zionis (jv); Syjonista, Syjonici (pl); , , , , (he); Seionaeth (cy); , , , , , , , , , , , , (yi); Sionista (ca); , , (arz); Zionista, Movimento sionista, Zionismo, Sionistas, Sionista, Nacionalismo judaico (pt); , , , , (ko); Cionists (lv); , , , , (ru); Zionistas, Sionistas, Zionizmas (lt); Cionizem (sl); Zionismo (lad); Zionist, Sionismo, Zionismo, Sionista, Syonista, Zionism, Zionists, Siyonista, Syonismo, Zionista (ceb); Zionism (ml); Zionism, (th); Sionismen (nn); Sionist, Zionisme, Sionistiske (nb); zionist, zionistisch, zionistische (nl); Zionis (id); Siyonizm (ku); Zionism, Sionist, Sionizm, Micarea sionist (ro); (sr); Sionistas (gl); , , , , , , Zionism, , , , , (ar); , (hy); , , , , , , , (zh)

Excerpt from:
Category:Zionism - Wikimedia Commons

Category: Zionism | Comments Off on Category:Zionism – Wikimedia Commons
Tags:

Posted By admin on December 20, 2018

Case Summary and Outcome

The Constitutional Court of Spain struck down part of a provision of the Criminal Code that penalized the denial and justification of the Nazi holocaust. The case was brought to the Constitutional Court by the Third Section of the Provincial Court of Barcelona after an individual was sentenced to an effective five years imprisonment for distributing material that denied the Holocaust. The Constitutional Court held that the simple denial of the Holocaust was a legitimate expression of freedom of speech as it did not constitute any threat or incitement to commit genocide and so declared that aspect of the legislation unconstitutional. However, the Court held that the legislations criminalization of the justification of the Holocaust was constitutional as expressions of justification constituted an indirect incitement to commit genocide.

Pedro Varela Geis was an owner of a library in Barcelona, Spain who distributed and sold different materials (including books, publications, letters, among others) that denied the Nazi holocaust that had occurred during the Second World War. Most of the documents incited the discrimination and hate against the Jewish community, and the people who visited the library most frequently were youths who believed in the use of violent means to resolve conflict.

On November 16, 1998, the Third Criminal Court of Barcelona sentenced Verla Geis to two years in prison under article 607.2 of the Criminal Code, for diffusion by any means of ideas or doctrines that deny or justify the crimes in the preceding Section of this Article, or that aim to reinstate regimes or institutions that protect practices that generate these . It also sentenced him to three additional years under article 510.1 of the Criminal Code for provoking discrimination, hate or violence against groups or associations due to racist, anti-Semitic reasons or any other related ideology, religion or belief, family situation, belonging to an ethnic group or race, national origin, gender, sexual preference, illness or handicap.

The Third Section of the Provincial Court of Barcelona appealed the judgment to the Constitutional Court on the grounds that it believed there was a constitutional incompatibility between the punishment of holocaust denial or justification in article 607.2 of the Criminal Code and the right to freedom of expression protected by article 20.1. of the Spanish Constitution.

The central issue before the Constitutional Court was whether article 607.2s criminalization (with the sanction of imprisonment) of the dissemination of ideas or doctrines denying or justifying the Holocaust was compatible with the constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression.

The appellant Court argued that the article was contrary to the right to freely express ideas and opinions.

TheAttorney General and the Prosecution Ministry argued that States are allowed to implement laws which interfere in the exercise of the right to freedom of expressionprovided that such restrictions aim to achieve a constitutionally legitimate purpose. They submitted that, in the present case, the legislators intention had been to preventconduct that could potentially generate further acts of racial or ethnic violence [p.14], and that the limitation of the right to freedom of expression through article 607.2 was therefore permissible.

The Constitutional Court acknowledged that article 607.2 addresses crimes ofgenocide defined as those who aim to fully or partially exterminate a national, ethnic, racial, religious or specific group.

In assessing the nature of the right to freedom of expression, the Court referred to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence which stressed that the right is a fundamental pillar in every democratic society, and recognized that the existence of free public opinion is an essential precondition for the exercise of other rights in the democratic system. The Courtnoted that, under Spanish law (STC 174-2006),the right to freedom of expression includes the freedom to criticize, even when this can be unpleasant and can disturb, concern or displease the target and so the right allows not only the dissemination of harmless ideas, but also those which are contrary to the views of State or any part of the population. Similarly, the Court recognized that theright encompasses the protection of subjective opinions about historic facts and that irrespective of how erroneous or unfounded they may the expression of the opinion is valid so long as it does not threaten the dignity of individuals or the peaceful coexistence of all members of society.

The Court held that statements, opinions and doubts about the concentration camps and the Nazi crimes against the Jewish community are protected by the right to freedom of expression, regardless of how reprehensible or misinterpreted they may be. The Court emphasized that these statements must be understood as subjective opinions on historical events.

However, the Court clarified that this does not imply that the free dissemination of ideas is an absolute right as degrading or offensive expressions are excluded from the protection of the right. The Court highlighted that article 20.1 of the Constitution does not protect expressions of a racist or xenophobic nature, and so the right to express and share a certain understanding of history does not extend to the discrimination of a group by virtue of its race or ethnicity. Accordingly, it does not protectoffensive statements against the Jewish people that deny the existence of the Nazi genocide.

In addition, the Court held that the right does not protect hate speech, which it defined asthe direct incitement to violence against citizens in general or against certain races or beliefs in particular [p.20]. Here again the Court referred to the ECtHR jurisprudence and noted that in assessing the legitimacy of limitations to the right it is necessary not only to prove the existence of damage, but also the express intention to destroy the freedom of others.

When applying these principles to the present case, the Court held that article 607.2 criminalized the mere expression of opinion without the additional requirements of the relevant statements including xenophobia or racism or incitement (direct or indirect) to commit genocide. The Court held that the structure of the article therefore did not require the presence of a threat or damage to other constitutionally protected rights in order for a crime to have been committed, and noted that the article criminalizes conduct that does not necessarily create a hostile environment.

The Court held that the criminalization of the denial of the Holocaust article did not constitute a justifiable use of criminal law to limit the right to freedom of expression because the mere denial of the Holocaust does not threaten the enjoyment of other constitutionally protected rights.

However, the Court held that this did not apply to article 607.2s criminalization of the justification of crimes committed against Jews during the Second World War. The Court held that justifying these atrocities constitutes an indirect incitement to its perpetration [p. 27] and so expressions of this nature cannot be protected by article 20.1 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the Court held that to the extent that article 607.2 criminalizes the justification of those atrocities it is a legitimate limitation of the right and therefore constitutional.

The Court declared that the word deny in article 607.2 was unconstitutional as it unjustifiably limited the right to freedom of expression, but that the provisions criminalization of the expression of ideas or doctrines justifying the crimes of genocide was a constitutional limitation of the right to freedom of expression.

There were four dissenting opinions. Judge Roberto Garcia-Calvo y Montiel stated that freedomof expression is not an absolute right and that racist or xenophobic statements are not protected under this right. In addition, he noted that there is a legal obligation to all States to prevent further acts of violence against determined groups and that allowing statements that deny atrocities from the past goes against this mandate. He stated that the Court should have examined the constitutionality of the article as a whole rather than assessing its distinct parts.

Judge Jorge Rodriguez-Zapata Perez referred to the historical context that addresses laws that punishthose who deny or misinterpret the Nazi holocaust. He also referred to the threat against pluralism in the European Union and noted that, so as not to repeat the errors of the last century, European States cannot become a refuge and propaganda centre for new xenophobic and racist groups. He noted that widening the scope of the protection of the right to freedom of expressionrepresents a regression in the guarantees of pluralism that have prevailed in Spain and Europe.

Judge Ramn Rodrguez Arribas stated that denying the Nazi genocide disrespects its victims and that by arguing that the right to freedom of expression protects such statements does, in fact, impair the right itself. He commented that protecting distorted opinions about this historical event encourages forgetting what actually happened. He emphasized that article 607.3 sought to protect society from behavior which could create an environment of violence and racial, ethnic or religious discrimination.

Judge Pascual Sala Sanchez stated that the majority judgments interpretation is contrary to Spains international legal obligations which require States to take effective measures to punish justification of genocide (including thedenial and trivialization of such crimes). He stated that the majority judgment restricts the scope of the legislation to criminalize and punish such reproachable conduct.

Read more:

The Case of the Holocaust Denial - Global Freedom of Expression

Category: Holocaust Denial | Comments Off on The Case of the Holocaust Denial – Global Freedom of Expression
Tags: