On March 17, the following note appeared on the Promised Land blog:
And this also happened this week: the office of the minister of education forbade distributing a booklet for kids about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because it didn’t like two articles in the declaration, as well as some of the illustration in the booklet.
The relevant link was to an article in Hebrew. I asked Noam which two articles had been specified, and he replied that the nrg.co.il article implied Article 14 and Article 18. These two articles are as follows:
"Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." (Article 14)
"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." (Article 18)
But apart from that Hebrew language piece, there is also a translated version of the story available here. Here is an extract:
The Ariel municipality decided to buy hundreds of copies of the book to distribute them as a gift to kindergarten children. But after the Education Ministry’s intervention, the books were returned, even though they had already been bought with money and a message from the municipality pasted in them. This is because the Education Ministry inspectors from the state religious department did not like two illustrations and two sections of the declaration, and decided to disqualify the book…
Mayor Ron Nahman said, “it is positive and good to hand out a book about children’s rights. But our attention was drawn to two sentences that are not exactly what we teach the children. The Education Ministry said this was wrong and we accepted its decision.”
slideshow of book and graphics.
Thanks for the slideshow link, but is that the very book in question – in English – or do they have a Hebrew version?
And how many times have I pointed out how Zionism and Israel are totally incompatible with the modern concept of human rights? I wish feeling vindicated didn’t leave me so bitter and depressed.
Reading a lot about WW1 lately. Zionism is awfully reminiscent of the way the nationalities of the Balkans thought about themselves, and the way they thought they had a self-determined right to live. Of course, having the advantage of actually living and having lived on the ground you claim and where you claim to be supreme lends a lot of weight to your arguments for self determination.
Yes, let’s see Witty defend this contradiction to his insitence that Zionism is humanism.
“Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” (Article 14)
“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.” (Article 18)
Article 14 – appears at first glance noble, but deeper reflection, it violates the right of the target country its collective ot communal right to determine, or decide n the matter according to its own laws and constitution. In brief this article categorically violates one state independence….
Article 18 – appears at first glance noble, but deeper reflection, it violative of spiritual morality… In the ancient scriptures, the Almighty only requires one our of seven days for rest and communal worship. The rest are considered working days….
Even the ancient scripture connotes – ‘there is time for every thing…’ time to work, time to rest, time to pray, and time to worship…Let the worship be held solemnly as proper in temples or centers of worship. But let it not be used to violate the rights of others, their right to work, their pursuit of personal time…their right to choose to worship or not to worship. It was also written that where the Spirit of the Lord, there is Liberty!
The statement – ‘to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance’ – is potentially offensive or violative to the norms of every independent country… It is solely favorable to one’s personal interest like the bus driver who stopped suddenly a public conveyance and went down t0 the middle of the road and do personal praying. But by depriving the passengers each of their individual times is likewise inimical and bigotry before one’s conscience to violate by obstructing the rest of the passengers or the public of their rights to individual pursuits or decisions. Was it not written? ‘whatever you have done to the least of my bretheren you have done it unto me’…
The decision of Education Ministry of Israel to refuse such articles that gives the privelege to others to abuse another man’s or community, or country’s freedom and right to self determinaition is just, fair, and right…
Pertaining Article 14 – every state reserves the right to grant assylum and refuse such whenever necessary, unless proven justifyable…
Kudos to Annie for finding the extracts and pictures. This is absolutely despicable, and should remind us that Israel is not just a western-style democracy imposed on Palestine, but a society based on a particular religion that has its own national religious police, of which this is a manfestation.
something tells me this graphic of a fence went over like a lead brick.
Note: “inspectors from the state religious department.”
Pingback: Israeli education ministry censors Universal Declaration of Human … · Staringfrog.com
Dr. Shlomo Alon, also of Israel’s Ministry of Education, seems to have devoted most of his life to what he calls “ever lasting peace” (and he continues to do so, by the way).
link to israel21c.org
Chaos4700 asks , “And how many times have I pointed out how Zionism and Israel are totally incompatible with the modern concept of human rights?”
I would reply…ad infinitum…ad nauseam.
Perhaps you could think of something new or constructive to say?
You can’t exactly build a house on a foundation that keeps sinking into the mud. And I know I’m the perpetual cloud in the silver lining, and I’m glad that you’ve brought forth Dr, Shlomo Alon, who is to be commended for the most part… is anyone else disturbed by the fact that Palestinians are referred to as “the other” in their own homeland?
Trumpeting Zionism’s incompatibility with any modern conception of human rights, especially the ones that allow you to say dumb things on the internet, Don, is indeed constructive, new to a lot of people, and should be said over and over.
Remember Don, the Zionists are trumpeting Zionism as essential to the modern conception of human rights. Branding that a lie cannot be done often enough.
Thanks for the article. Although Dr. Alon seems to have a commendable attitude, apparently he has little influence at the Ministry of Education, since the banning of the Human Rights booklet does not indicate any true interest in “ever lasting peace” on the part of the ministry.
Your article also points out a few of the institutional problems in Israel. Arabic is technically one of the two official languages of Israel, the other being, of course, Hebrew. And yet, according to Alon, Arabic was only an “elective” in Jewish schools, and not a requirement. Also, I found this to be another failing of the education system in Israel:
Meanwhile, Alon also continues to dream, in Arabic: “I have a dream that more [Israeli] Arabs will teach in Jewish schools. Today, there are about 120 Arab Israeli teachers, making up only eight to nine percent of the Arabic teaching staff.
This is a very small percentage. AndI would guess that the percentage of Israeli Arabs teaching in Jewish schools, who are NOT teaching Arabic, is next to nil. Why is that so? This is part of the problem. On a more basic level, the fact that the state of Israel decided to separate education for Jewish and Arab students is a major contributor to the problem of seeing fellow Israeli citizens as “the other”. Alon seems to have severely limited his dreams. He would be much more true to his calling for “ever lasting peace” to dream of an Israeli school system that doesn’t separate Jews and Arabs and one that requires the learning of both official languages of Israel.
And Chaos has an excellent point. Israel has set up over 20% of its own native-born citizens as “the other”.
Everyone in Israel is an Other. Jew/Arab isn’t the only segregation line, there is a “national” a “national/religious” and a “religious” school system – this is not counting the Haredi schools that are independent. All Othering the other.
The Education Dept recently closed a school for girls where the Shepardi students weren’t allowed to be in the proximity of the Ashkenaki. All Jews aren’t created equal in Israel.
In the old USA this system used to be called “separate but equal.” Government funding for the respective “water fountains” was always, of course, unequal. Seems Israel has channeled Boss Hog.
Don,
First off, you are right in pointing out Shlomo Alon’s views and attitudes.
Second, the fact that he holds those attitudes and views, does not negate the institutionalized racism, discrimination and exceptionalism that are at the heart of this colonial enterprise known as Israel.
Third, if you want to quote anything of value that Shlomo Alon said, try to avoid using quotes that contain the word “peace” as many fanatical Zionist Jews have rendered that term hollow.
The more significant point that Shlomo Alon makes in that article to which you linked, is that learning the language of the Other helps in building understanding.
Incidentally, Arabic is taught at the highschool level in Israel, but classes are not treated as other foreign language classes. That is to say that while English classes teach students basic English grammar, a wide range of vocabulary and English and American literature, Arabic classes focus on conversational phrases, military oriented vocabulary and no Arabic literature whatsoever.
But apparently the Arabic classes are not good enough for military purposes. If I remember rightly, an Israeli commando raid in Lebanon was sussed by a Hezbollah guard because of their poor Arabic. He waved them through the checkpoint, then called the next checkpoint to set up an ambush.
Pingback: Israeli education ministry censors Universal Declaration of Human …
It is right that this story combined with the passing of the Nakba law as on The Promised Land blog. There is no recognition of human rights for all in Israel because the Palestinians are considered not to be human beings, and they want to keep the delicate sensibilities of their children free from the fact that all people should exist in equality.
I just got an image in my mind of Disney’s Snow White and the 7 Dwarves. I then am reminded of how in so many African nations, their actual culture , the color line is adjusted like a machine gun air sight. The lighter skin, the better. The irony is how many average Americans, upon viewing many Israelis and Palestinians, can actually
tell the difference on sight?
I would have imagined they’d censored the UDHR at least in part because it says that everyone has a right to LEAVE ANY country and everyone has a right to GO HOME to his OWN country. (Israel doesn’t agree. 1948 anybody?)
This fragmentation is a very interesting aspect of the problem. We grew in Quebec. There the education system is split up on religious and linguistic fault lines. Catholic/French, Catholic/English, Protestant/French, Protestant/English, and broadly I think still is. The good thing was that noncatholics got put into the ‘protestant’ side. All the jews, maronites and non-judeo-christians such as myself etc were made honorary protestants. Something of a melting pot. Once you got into the ‘french protestant’ system, it was actively international, great fun, but totally unrepresentative of the wider society. I am convinced that this schism helped reinforce divisions
Mercifully though, and quite different from the problems of palestinians, although there was active discrimination in quebec, it was on linguistic grounds, not religion.
The UDHR has another provision which might have motivated the Israeli censors,
The last bit would seem to purport to guarantee to Palestinian refugees of 1948 a right of return.
Avi, Mooser, and Tree ,
It was not my intent to deny the many institutional problems with Israel, or Zionism, for that matter. But it seems to me many things are said about Israel as though they “most certainly true”, when in fact they are in all probability false.
“Zionism is incompatible with human rights”, for example. It has certainly been manifested, and is currently manifested, in very unjust treatment of Palestinians. No question there. But “it must be” so? What is the basis of this statement?
It makes no sense to me whatsoever, for example, to refer to the American south, where treatment of blacks was vastly worse, and for a much longer period of time, and point out how terrific it is that most of that has changed. And in the same breath suggest such change is impossible for Israel. Logic does not necessarily answer moral questions, but it deserves a place in the discussion, at least in my opinion.
Ms Lawrence of Cyberia, though her blog is excellent, make the same mistake (in my opinion). “No nation founded in hatred or injustice can survive, deserves to exist, or however she recently put it. This from a citizen of England? just how many Africans died miserable deaths, or lived miserable lives, due to the English slave trade? But England changed (though not entirely voluntarily). And perhaps someone can tell me about all the nations “founded in love and brotherhood”? Nation building has usually been, as far as I can tell, a brutal and bloody business.
The history of the west is replete with nations (and sometimes several nations) changing, for better or worse, in as little as one generation. How is it Israel is necessarily excluded from this possibility? That is all I am saying, or perhaps asking.
Don,
I sincerely hope that Israel can change institutionally, and there are a few signs, though at present insignificant that it may be possible. But that change can not happen without a turning away from Zionism. Its like asking the US South to change while still embracing white supremacy, to to make an analogy that might be a bit more distressing for some, expecting Germany to change while still embracing Nazism. Zionism is built on a belief that Israel must not be the state of all its citizens but rather the state of the Jews everywhere. It will never treat its non-Jewish citizens as equals when it equates the state with Jews first and foremost. I’m hopeful that Israel could overcome its foundation, and its embrace of an ideology that greatly discriminates against the Palestinians, as well as other non-Jews, but I firmly believe that the only way to achieve equality and justice in Israel is for Israel to be constantly confronted on the injustices of its ideology, rather than being coddled and excused like a co-dependent excuses a belligerent drunkard. Israel has to be constantly asked why it can’t be a state of all its citizens.
As much as its nice that Alon wants more Israeli Jews to speak Arabic, its a travesty that 60 years into Israel’s existence so few Jews do speak it, and if Avi’s info on Israeli high school Arabic is correct, and I have no reason to believe he not correct, then even the Arabic that is taught is not focused on understanding and acceptance, but a symptom of a denigration of Palestinians. If Alon would dream a little bigger, perhaps there would be a better chance for Israel to become a fairer, more just nation. Teaching Jewish and Arab students in the same classroom, with Hebrew and Arabic as both mandatory languages would be a very bold step in the right direction, but I’m afraid that the racism in Israel is too institutionalized to accept such a bold step. The little faith I have is centered in groups like Taayush, AAW, ICAHD, Zochrot, New Profile and others that are small and with no wide support in the overall society.
I would hope that my own personal experience is good enough. There are certainly others on this website (not the usual trolls) who can correct any information I post and I welcome them to scrutinize whatever I post.
Now, the following is not directed at you, tree, at all, but do those who accuse me and others of not telling the truth or not being accurate about the descriptions I or others provide really think that we’re doing it out of malice and hatred?
Why?? What insidious motive could I or others have? But, I guess I’m just a self hating Israel hater Jew, even though I’m Jewish-by-association like Morgan Elzey.
I definitely think nations founded on lies/hatred/ethnic cleansing like Israel can survive.
Look at all that has happened and it’s only getting worse. People shouldn’t make these lofty statements. Stay focused, ignore the asinine trolls (Dick Witty, yonira, etc.) and fight for the Palestinians.
.
Don,
You seem to be either unaware of certain undeniable truths, or are merely a troll like yonira and the others.
This line certainly reflects that kind of arrogant confidence you have in your own alleged “truth”:
.
In all probability? So what you’re saying is this: “I haven’t a clue what I’m talking about, but all those nasty things you Israel haters are saying can’t possibly be true”.
First and foremost, the Palestinians of the occupied territories are not citizens of Israel. That’s one BIG difference between them and the blacks in the Jim Crow south.
So internalize this simple fact for a moment and think of the implications and ramifications.
Second, unlike the civil court system that which has jurisdiction over colonial settlers, Palestinians are governed by a military system in which one regional commander has the final word in matters that affect the lives of millions of Palestinians.
As for Zionism, the difference is that the blacks of the Jim Crow south did not have to put up with a system that was racist in principle, too. It may have been racist in practice, but the US constitution certainly granted them rights that they managed to attain through civil disobedience and litigation. Israel has no constitution.
Now, if you’d like to continue to lecture us about the extent to which it hurts your sensibilities that everyone on here is posting FACTS that are so painful you’re getting an ulcer, then perhaps its time you grabbed yourself by the bootstraps and read a little about Zionism, Israel’s own laws and spent a few months in the occupied territories. Or, at the very least show some basic understanding of the system you’re defending and make a valid argument.
Webster defines “Contradiction” as:
That is Zionism. Zionism, democracy and human rights are contradictory terms that cannot exist in one legitimate entity.
When you are able and prepared to admit that, come back and lecture us. OK?
One more thing:
Israel and its blind supporters continue to defend the status quo and continue to ignore and deny that the core problem is Zionism and racism, nevermind the historical background that is at the heart of this very conflict.
Until such time when you and millions of AIPAC types are willing to admit that, then we can talk about the type of transformation you mention regarding “Western states”.
What are you saying here? Do you really think that people are calling for the extermination of Israelis? “Nation” is often used to refer to “Nation States”. In other words, a country, a political entity.
You’re making all kinds of wild assumptions based on fear alone.
Just to provide some context (since I haven’t read it anywhere in the original referenced articles) Ariel is an illegal settlement in the West Bank, one of two which Netanyahu declared to be “indisputably” part of Israel.
Avi,
With all due respect, and I mean that sincerely, perhaps you need to “get a grip”.
You suggest I am a troll? And not too many months ago, Richard Wittyy basicallly accused me of being an anti-semitic racist?
Your response to me addresses many issues I did not raise; did I accuse you of being a self-hating Jew? I am no fan of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians; I find it morally appalling.
In general, your response is directed at “so many things I did not say”, it confirms by basic feeling about this issue. When it comes toI srael…most people seem to lose the capacity to think critically.
As for the distinction between “theory and practice” in regard to human rights, I would strongly suggest that to the person whose human rights are violated…the fact that “in theory those rights are protected”, is quite irrelevant. Join an online Native American discussion group, and find out for yourself how delighted they are with “their theoretical human rights”.
I was initially simply trying to point out that there are Israelis who do in fact seek coexistence with Arabs. That’s it. How on earth do you read so much else into it?
You might want to read the post again. In part of it I addressed tree and in the rest I spoke in general about others on this website. It was not directed at you.
I disagree. You ignore my point entirely regarding the separate judicial system in the occupied territories and focus instead on this theory vs. practice issue. Furthermore, the blacks in the south were able to change the system because their calls for equality had historical and foundational basis. There is a great difference between the principles on which the US was founded and the Zionist principles on which Israel was founded.
That fact is pretty obvious. The point I’d like to make, however, is that the group of Israelis in questions is not only small, but it is marginalized and persecuted within Israel. So to focus on that group in an attempt to look-at-the-glass-half-full, as you seem to imply, is to live in denial of the overall cesspool.
In conclusion, I do hope that Zionism will be erased for good and that it will disappear forever, along with its symbols and manifestations the same way the Third Reich has been erased. Meanwhile, the Jews of a modern Israel (or whatever name it will have) like the Germans of modern Germany will one day be embarrassed of that dark chapter of their history and seek to join the 21st century along with its safeguards of human dignity and equality.
Pingback: Lecture Notes: Indiana University Maurer School of Law: Bloomington | Educational Kansas