JBlog Carnival Updates, HH, KCC & JPIX

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

"Democracy" is Not The Main Aim of the State of Israel

The State of Israel was not established to be a bastion of Democracy and "Western Ideals" sic. The State of Israel was established to be a Jewish State.

Early days of political Zionism were in the time when Europe was changing, and all sorts of nationalisms were developing. One of them was Jewish Nationalism aka Zionism. The Land of Israel had always been a magnet for Jews, although ever since the destruction of the Second Holy Temple and the defeat of the Jewish Kingdoms, independent Jewish rule seemed relegated to history books. There were thriving and active Jewish communities in all sorts of cities all over the Land of Israel during the two thousand years of the exile. Not only were there Jews in Jerusalem and Tzfat, but even those that today are empty of identifying Jews, like Gaza, had strong active communities.

Please remember that during those two thousand years, no other people rose to make an independent country in this Holy Land. It was always ruled by a foreign empire.

The early zionists of the late 19th, early 20th centuries debated the form of society and government. Among the secular, infatuated with modern ideologies more than with Judaism and traditional western ideals, socialism/communism was their ideal, not democracy.

The United States, led by its President Franklin Delano Roosevelt  sent Jewish refugees back to Germany to be murdered during the Holocaust, story of the St. Louis.

One of the overcrowded boatloads of Jewish refugees barred by Great Britain from entering the Holy Land.

When the State of Israel was finally established in 1948, the various Zionist leaders compromised on a form of parliamentary democracy and not socialism. But the signers of the Declaration of Independence knew they were doing something very important for international Jewry in establishing a Jewish State, the only one in the world. Just a few short years after the Holocaust, when Jews had no political refuge, it was clear, even to "the world" that there was a need for a Jewish State.  That's why there was a majority vote for the establishment of a Jewish state in what was then the Mandated Palestine. And please don't forget that Great Britain had been mandated, meaning instructed to establish a Jewish state here in the Land of Israel. 

Post-World War Two many countries, some brand new, like Jordan, without any historical basis. They were total inventions.

So, when the Israeli Left keeps harping that laws and legal decisions go against the principles of the State of Israel which they claim is supposed to be secular democratic, they are lying. We are not supposed to be collecting/accepting every single foreign non-Jew who wants to live here and take advantage of the relatively high standard of living and top notch medical care.

The State of Israel was established for Jews and nobody else. Non-Jews can live here if they are obeying the law and have entered legally. Others must be deported, just like is done in all other western, modern countries/democracies.

8 comments:

Mr. Cohen said...

improved version:

Cornelius Tacticus, the famous Jew-hating Roman historian who lived from year 56 CE (approximately) to year 120 CE said:

“Much of Judea is thickly studded with villages, and the Jews have towns as well.
Their capital is Jerusalem. Here stood their Temple with its boundless riches.”

MODERN SOURCE OF QUOTE:

The Western World (page 141) by Pearson Custom Publishing, year 2009 CE

ORIGINAL SOURCE OF QUOTE:
The Histories by Tacitus, The Jews (Book 5), paragraph 8 of 13.

CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS QUOTE:

{1} Muslims are LYING when they deny that Jews trace their historical origins to the Land of Israel.

{2} Muslims are LYING when they deny that Jerusalem is the historical capital of the Jewish state.

{3} Muslims are LYING when they deny that the Jewish Temple existed in Jerusalem.

{4} Notice that Tacticus mentioned Judea, NOT Palestine.

{5} Tacticus never mentioned the Palestinian people, even though he wrote much about Jews and their land, because there were no Palestinian people in his time.

vincent said...

It's official now, they have gone crazy.
http://www.debka.com/article/24802/New-rules-Israeli-troops-must-fire-in-the-air-when-engaging-terrorists
Don't know about you guys, but i am getting out the champagne! (no, i am not)
Only a 'gay' general can think of something like this.

daniel said...

"Please remember that during those two thousand years, no other people rose to make an independent country in this Holy Land."

I like your message, but this line is an often repeated idea that is not totally accurate.
There is one exception:
The Crusader's "Kingdom of Jerusalem" was an independent country in the Holy Land, established by European Catholics in 1099 who came to "rescue" the Holy Land from the "infidel Muslims". It lasted until 1187 and was reestablished in 1192 lasting until 1291. The Crusaders slaughtered many thousands of Jews and Muslims in the Holy Land, destroying the Jewish communities in Jerusalem, Haifa and elsewhere despite their efforts to defend themselves.

vincent said...

Becaue: Umwertung Aller Wette : revaluation of all values
http://www.amazon.com/Umwertung-Aller-Werte-Monographien-Nietzsche-Forschung/dp/3110117096
If you don't know that an exit fot faeces, is not an entrance for love making. (revaluation) And if you don't know about the pink swastika. (google that TA !) Than that, and the atheism of the zionists regime, which is a travesty on it's own. Well, do i need to say more?

Batya Medad said...

Crusaders were invaders who destroyed a lot and didn't last long.The Jewish connection has never stopped over thousands of years.

daniel said...

Batya,
That's right they were invaders who destroyed a lot.
They did last nearly 200 years.
They did not manage to destroy the Jewish connection to the land. There were survivors, and they were joined by returning Jews in every single century since then.
However, it is still not correct to say "no other people rose to make an independent country in this Holy Land", since the Crusaders did rise to make an independent country in this land that lasted about as long as the Hasmonean rule.
The modern state of Israel still has many years left to reach that length of time.
The Jewish connection to land doesn't go away because someone else tried to make an independent state. I guess that what you are trying to say is that other peoples don't have the same connection to the land since they didn't attempt to make an independent state. The Crusaders did, yet they had no historical connection. Their connection to it actually was a product of the Jewish connection, however, their Catholic theology taught them that they had replaced the Jews.
There is also another people that have attempted to make an independent state in Israel and have failed, the "Palestinians". However, one could argue against their historical connection to it. One could argue that they were only interested in that once the Jews were attempting to establish their own state. One could argue that their true goal is just that there should not be a Jewish state or presence in this land.
It would perhaps be more correct to state your point in a way that says, there were no local people who attempted to create an independent state in the holy land since Judea lost its independence until the attempt to establish the modern Jewish state, and the only foreigners who did were the European Catholic Crusaders who invaded at the end of the 11th century.
Your arguments are stronger when they are precise.
Although the Jewish connection and indeed Jewish communal presence has not left the land of Israel, the connection did weaken through the exile. The Jews were a minority population in Israel not so long ago due to a combination of persecution and some Jewish apathy.
It is to our own shame and causes us tremendous difficulty in reestablishing our connection to the land and convincing the world of its authenticity and legitimacy.
As we read on 9 b'Av:
בושנו מאד כי עזבנו ארץ - ירמיהו ט:יז

Batya Medad said...

There would have had been many more Jews here in the Holy Land by the middle of the twentieth century if Great Britain hadn't strictly forbidden/limited Jewish repatriation/immigration. Even during the Holocaust and immediately afterwards, GB did everything in its power to keep Jews out and frustrate Jewish Nationalism. Considering that the mandated job of Great Britain had been to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish state, I'd say that GB violated international law!!
And today, you can consider the crusaders to be barely a footnote in history, while the State of Israel is major headlines.

daniel said...

Yes Batya, definitely. GB's immigration restrictions was part of the "persecution" that I mentioned.
I don't agree that the Crusaders should be barely a footnote in history. At the time it was also "major headlines", and lasted much longer than the state of Israel has so far.
If the crusades had not happened and the tens of thousands of Jews in Israel who were killed and others who fled would have survived and remained there. Their descendants would possibly have added up to many more people than GB prevented from immigrating. (On the other hand, as a result of the crusader kingdom, travel from Europe to the Holy Land became easier.)
Also, while the British did keep Jews out, prevent them from purchasing land, and fail to protect them from Arab riots, had the Ottomans still been in power any Jewish uprising or attempt at independence would likely have resulted in a brutal suppression of that uprising including massacring the Jewish population. Compared to that the British were very tame. So, the British Mandate was a stepping stone to Israeli independence, that later became an obstacle but a smaller obstacle than was present before them.
My point in bringing up the crusades of course had nothing to do with them versus the British or how significant they were to the future of Jews in Israel.