Jack Ross responds to expressions of Muslim chauvinism during the flap over the Chris Caldwell book:
I remain stunned by the ability of so many Palestinian activists to completely without irony mirror Zionist sloganeering in their talk of the "Palestinian people" and the collective prerogatives thereof. One need not deny or diminish the justice on the side of the Palestinian cause to acknowledge that Palestinian nationalism is no less invented than Jewish nationalism.
So long as this construction is at the heart of Palestinian agitation, as opposed to simply appealing to human decency at the sight of atrocities such as those in Gaza, it will play right into the hands of advocates for a "two-state solution". To the declaration of a Tzipi Livni that "the Arabs will come to recognize that their national aspirations lie elsewhere", the very notion of placing the Palestinians into Zionism’s own template must be rejected.
But let me be clear – this nationalism was the spawn and legacy of Zionism. So also was the proposition at the heart of so much of political Islam, perhaps even the very notion of political Islam itself: The Muslim Brotherhood was founded by a group who looked to Zionism as their example. That is, still believing that the Jews were a religion and not a "nation", they ominously and erroneously applied the rhetorical construct of Zionism to the purely religious concept of the umma, in other words, the bizarre and utterly impracticable idea of all the world’s one billion Muslims being organized along the lines of modern nationalism.
Lest I be accused of using high-minded idealism to camoflage my own Jewish biases, I must also add that I implore against a creed of nationalistic vengeance from the Palestinians because it would be the ultimate tragedy if they should become the thing they most hate by elevating their collective tragedy to the eschatological significance that Jews have ascribed to the Holocaust. This has had not only the most tragic warping effect on both Jews and Arabs, but the high cost of vengeance against Nazism has also included the warped morality on which both EU totalitarianism and, for lack of a more artful term, Islamism in Europe, have thrived.
I dearly hope and pray that a just resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might serve as a true breakthrough for the triumph of truth and reconciliation against the barbarism in the name of progress that was the 20th century and which itself spawned, among so many other evils, the State of Israel.
Jack, could you elaborate. I am not sure, if I understand what you are trying to say:
but the high cost of vengeance against Nazism has also included the warped morality on which both EU totalitarianism and, for lack of a more artful term, Islamism in Europe, have thrived.
I should add, I like this note a lot.
I liked this note too.
Jack Ross, This website published an endorsement of a racist book, with quite some evidence of racism in the review. M. Idrees was thankfully given the right to reply, and now you complain of “Mulslim Chauvinism.” I think this is ignorant and smells of, how should we call it, a deep sense of whiteness. If you don’t publish racist crap about Muslims there would be no need for them to defend themselves and educate you.
As for your theory of nationalism and strategy. It is rather thin. Oppressed people organize on the basis of their oppression. Does LGBT activism “falls into the hands” of those who want a two state solution for LGBT people and straight? Should textile workers not organize on the basis of their work? Nationalism and religion are complex and problematic formations, and organizing with them, like every real politics, carries risks, but Palestinians are oppressed based on their national identity. They are stopped at checkpoints based on their national identity. Hence the nation is the natural and obvious unit of organizing and struggle. Real political struggles are not won by appeals to charity. They are won by organizing the victims.
As for appealing to the decency of the White Man. The majority of humanity has doubts today whether white people have decency. Your post doesn’t help.
You say very clearly what bothered me about Ross’s piece. Oppressed people organize themselves within constraints that are established by the oppressors. If nationalism is a tool that can be used to build movement solidarity then so be it. The Soviets certainly used nationalism to unite her people against the Nazi invasion. I am sure that Ross had no complaints about the use of religion that the Southern Blacks used during the civil rights movement though he likely does not have much use of southern Baptist theology.
I guess the Nazis were the only honest predators; they did not directly (at least) harness their tanks to Christianity. They based the tank fuel on Darwin, zero-sum gaming theory, and (e.g. Streicher’s defense at Nuremberg, the first PC version of free speech
casuality). Stalin was losing fast until he realized the secular religion of Communism would never get his
troops to fight like demons; and so he went back to common religio-patriotism.
Ross is right in that the Palestinians copied the Zionists’ unification of religion and
and actual land. Syvanen is right in that King united religion and politics–the absence
of a takeover of land during King’s reign is a key distinction, as is the fact black americans were imported as literal slaves.
What exactly is Ross saying those who care should do, or defend, or carry forward?
You fail to provide examples of Zionist sloganeering.
Are you saying that Muslims have used Zionism as a model, “ominously and erroneously”, for one billion Muslims? It difficult to understand you points.
I too am confused by the post.
I personally think that both Israeli nationalism (Zionism) and Palestinian nationalism are good movements, when they are stated in positive terms of their needs and collective aspirations.
I think your insight of the adoption of nationalist language to umma is insightful, growing out of the confusion of what Zionism is (religious vs nationalist).
There are ways that the umma concept and Zionism are similar, not that they are religious, but that they are social rather than geographical in orientation. They are expressions of self-governance of non-geographically defined peoples, or some other basis of self-governance.
The umma is global in scale, and is a different scale than a “nation” perse, and that in itself is a qualitative difference between the two concepts.
The idea of umma as definining national entity, with some geographic consciousness “this is Muslim land” and NOT Christian, and NOT Jewish, and NOT civil, is a component of some neo-conservative observation, true in ways.
The point is, I at least take it, is that Zionism and Palestinian nationalism are NOT good movements–they unify religion and nationalism. Think, the Crusades with
a shield of modern nationalism. The point is, good for whom, Richard Witty. You don’t have to worry about that since you are protected by poor goy cops and soldiers and live in a state that separates religion from the state. How convenient for you,
Mister Everywitchwaybutruth.
The pigeon believes that one source of this phenomenon is that so many have internalized the unfortunate belief that the state is the people and the people are the state. Respect for a state is a way of expressing support for a people and any doubts about the state are in turn disrespectful of the people. Thus to show affection for the Jewish people, (and expiate guilt over the holocaust), one must support the Stateof Israel. Upon discovering the fact there were Palestinians as well and that they were unjustly used, one likewise is conditioned to respect them, (and expiate guilt over their dispossession), by expressing support for a Palestinian state.
How foul. What treif! Expecially when married to primitive tribalism such as manifested by Zionism. And the Palestinians fell into an unfortunate Zionist trap by giving the notion of a state precedence over a diligent focus on basic universal human rights.
Let’s try on some ideas here:
No state has an inherent right to exist – not Israel, not the Palestinian Authority, not the Washington regime, not the Mongolian state or any other state on the planet.
We should not express friendship for the Jewish people but supporting the fraud which occupies Palestine. If I hated Jews I could do no better than to support this thing which is causing them so much misery and putting them in so much danger.
We should not express friendship for Palestinians by wishing them a similar curse.
A just solution will reject primitive tribalism and respect universally applied property and civil rights for all who live between the river and the sea in the “one country solution.” Yes, that will require a state apparatus of sorts, possibly even the existing Israeli one, albeit reformed and stripped down in size as much as possible, and recruiting staff from returned Palestinians.
Excellent post! It’s the “isms” that are literally killing us: nationalism, tribalism, zionism, nazism, racism. Let’s not replace one with another, let’s work toward justice instead.
This sounds like Witty’s dream. Am I wrong? OTH, every modern state (think WW1 aftermath as before that time it was generally acceptable to change state borders by force) assumes its “inherent” right to exist. And the highest level (UN) of world political power assumes so too. So, there’s no point at all in saying “no state has an inherent right to exist”– Any bundle of rights assumes the legal giver.
Where does this leave Israel now?
No wonder it disses the UN and ignores it.
The real issue is why does the USA allow it to do so, and at the USA’s expense, especially in the long run?
USA citizens, wake up!
I think Mr. Ross has managed to twist to distinct ideas into one – Palestinian nationalism and Islamism. The former is as much an invention as Zionism and it can be argued, was created as an Arab reaction to Zionism. Both are artificial (as all nationalities ultimately are) and therefore, no-one should be hesitant to get rid of both and replace them with a national identity common to both Jews and Arabs in the region.
Islamism, was formed not as a reaction to Zionism, but parallel to it. (I see Islamism as Zionism’s twin sister and Palestinian nationalism as Zionism’s child). In modern Palestinian politics, Fatah represents Palestinian nationalism, Hamas represents a mix of both Islamism and Palestinian nationalism (tilting towards the former) and the various smaller Islamic parties represent pure Islamism.
The former is as much an invention as Zionism and it can be argued, was created as an Arab reaction to Zionism.
I agree, to not go into the complex history of the issue in Jewish history, the issue can be easily witnessed at least it feels in the argument that the Palestinian people never were a nation and thus ultimately have no right to a state.
Also we usually witness efforts to either simply attribute them to an undefined larger Arab nation, who you surely all remember should have simply integrated the Palestinians into their countries, but failed to do so.
In this context Palestinian nationalism obviously must be partly a reaction.
And you say the Jews were a nation 3,000 years ago by your lights, and where do you get this information from, from ancient narratives? Way back then, did not Egypt and subsequently Rome, define the anti-thesis? From that POV, the Palestinians are very very much a nation as much as the Israeites ever were. In this contcxt, David has been supplanted by a Palestinian kid throwing pebbles at at a USA enabled Israeli tank, or American -produced bulldowzer. nicht whar?
I am sure Jack Ross need one or two lessons in Islamic Faith and Islamic history.
Islam is totally against all kind of nationalisms. It is Universal Faith – quite different from Judaism and Christianity – both of which are tribal religions (only for the Israelites).
Islam commands that all the Believers, irrespect of their skin color, ethnicity, the land the live or the language they speak (other than Arabic) – belongs to one community – known as Ummah (the brotherhood). The Egyptian group established by Imam Hasan al-Banna was named “al-Ikhwan al-Muslemoon”, which got translated into “the Muslim Brotherhood”. It started as a social organization – just like Hamas, Hizb’Allah, and Jamait-e-Islami (Pakistan) – but eventually all of them entered into politics – with different agenda.
Unlike Judaism and Christianity – Islamic teachings don’t separate spiritual acts of worship from the political sector of Muslim communities. In Islam, mosque is also the White House. It doesn’t believe in the biblical commandment: “Give to Cessar what belongs to him – and give to God what belongs to Him”. In Islam – every and each human act belongs to Allah – and each Believer is answerable for his/her actions in this life. There is no Salvation through the Church or Rabbi in Islam.
The great majority of Palestinians – both Muslims and Christians – are not resisting Jewish occupation of their lands fo religion. They are doing it for honor, dignity, freedom, and for their very survival.
Nothing wrong being a ‘radical’ Muslim…
link to rehmat1.wordpress.com
Rehmat, just as Jack Ross might need a lesson in Islam, I think you need a lesson in Christianity.
Christianity is not a tribal religion, unless you consider it the religion of the tribe known as “the whole human race.” Christianity teaches that we are all siblings, children of God. True Christians are to believe that “There is neither Gentile nor Jew, freeman or slave, male or female for you all are brothers in Christ.” The whole of Jesus’ religion can be boiled down to the first 2 words of the Lord’s Prayer: “Our Father” for if I truly believe that we share a father, than that makes you my brother, and obviously I am supposed to treat you with love and respect and not steal your land or wage war against you. The 10 Commandments are obsolete. Now obviously, many Christians do not act in this way but this goes against the teachings of the founder of the religion and they are not acting as true Christians (Bush comes to mind.) Jesus said it best when he said “You cannot put new wine into old wine skins.” In other words, a new religion was being born, not an offshoot of Judaism which teaches that Jews are the favorite people of God and that for a Jew his “neighbor” is another Jew. This was a radical new concept 2,000 years ago and still is today; a declaration of the universal brotherhood of man many years before DNA analysis would show how we are all related!
How is Islam “Universal” when it lays claim to the political sphere of society while excluding all non-Muslims.?
You don’t know reality; reality means the Jewish and Islamic teachings as practiced in any state both conflate
religion and politics. It is only in mostly Christian countries that religion is kept mostly separate from the state. Show me where I am wrong, please.