Comments on: Jack Ross Takes on Ralph Seliger’s Claim Re Binationalist Zionists

By: the Sword of Gideon

the Sword of Gideon — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Who the fuck is the evidently legendary Jack Ross.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

You need to learn to read Phil.

Did you understand that there was a dialog between multiple applications of Zionism in the different phases of the Yishuv?

Did you also not understand the word "MAYBE" in Ralph's post?

"The Jews did not come to Palestine as conquerors but as refugees seeking a home. I know that the Arabs thought of them as a threat, but if their response had been peaceful rather than the pogroms of 1920, '21, '29, and the rebellion of '36-'39, and if they had not made the British close the doors of Palestine in 1939 -- just when the Jews were especially desperate for refuge -- maybe "my" ideological Zionist forebears (who were bi-nationalists) might have prevailed in the Yishuv to forge a better, common future for both peoples. "

Why are you so belligerent about this?

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

"Jack Ross has studied Zionist history"

You are gullible now Phil.

Why don't YOU study?

By: chimpsky

chimpsky — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

In fact there was Zionist support for a bi-national state before Biltmore. Ben Gurion and others supported the so-called "Peel Partition Plan" of 1937 (and were discussing "population transfer"–i.e., ethnic cleansing a la Smyrna 1923). Ben Gurion made statements that indicate this was a tactical move on his part and he saw this as only a first step. Acceptance of partition would move beyond the careful ambiguity of the Balfour declaration to an actual Jewish State which he expected to expand in time. In this context Jabotinsky's "Iron Wall" clarifies the silly notion that if only the Arabs had been more accommodating things would have worked out differently. Anyone who thinks Zionism can really be liberal or progressive should re-read Jabotinsky.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Chimpsky,
How about some citations to support your "reporting" of Zionist history?

By: chimpsky

chimpsky — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Richard, Citations are appropriate when making statements that are not common knowledge. Ben Gurion's actual quote and it's context would be called for but I don't have the time to hunt it down now…

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

"Common knowledge"

Now we're back to rumors, absence of context, straw dogs.

Maybe he did say it and meant it the way you interpret. Maybe Ahmenijidad did say it and did mean it.

Maybe not. Who can tell from your comments?

By: Eva Smagacz

Eva Smagacz — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

This is Ben-Gurion commenting on Partition Scheme proposed by British in 1930s:

"The Jewish State now being offered to us is not the Zionist objective. Within this are it is not possible to solve the Jewish question. But it can serve as a decisive stage along the path to greater Zionist implementation. It will consolidate in Palestine, within the shortest possible time, the real Jewish force which will lead us to our historic goal."

In his private correspondence to his son, Ben-Gurion was more explicit:

(the Jewish State would have) "an outstanding army - I have no doubt that our army will be among the world's outstanding - and so I am certain that we won't be constrained from settling in the rest of the country, whether out of accord and the mutual understanding with the Arab neighbours, or otherwise."

The context can be glimpsed in Yosef Gorny's and Chaya Galai's "Zionism at the Arabs, 1882-1948: a study of Ideology". Hardcover at Amazon.co.uk at £56.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Eva,
Are you clear what Ben Gurion is responding to?

It sounds from your quote that he is referring to a proposal of a demilitarized Israel, and objects to that diminished sovereignty.

Not all that different from Abbas insisting on a fully sovereign Palestine.

That doesn't describe evil, but liberty.

By: Eva Smagacz

Eva Smagacz — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

I don't think that there ever was a discussion mentioned, in which Ben-Gurion took part, of demilitarized Israel, so no, I absolutely do not believe that the above quotes can be interpreted as calling for anything but expansion of Zion, and I am surprised that you could entertain such an interpretation.

In 1938 Ben-Gurion wrote:
"After we become a strong force, after the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine".