Joseph Dana and Max Blumenthal published their promised article on the J14 protest movement, and it is disappointing. The only part of Israel they see is the Ashkenazi middle class of Tel Aviv. That, the protest of that sector, which started the #J14 events, they dismiss as nothing more than an attempt to return to the Zionism of the “good old days.” Fair enough. Everything they say about the limitations of the protest movement, I agree. Although their attempt to offer a pop psychology of the “radical Israeli left” (two people, to be precise) should have been beneath them.
Then there is the bad part. Look at whom they interview, a media professional, a mainstream journalist, a young labor apparatchik, a think tank fellow. That is Israeli society? Tent protests happened all the way from Sderot to Kyriat Shmone, places as far in social outlook from Rothschild Blvd as Gary, Indiana is from the East Village. Even in Tel Aviv there were multiple protests, of very different social make up. Dana and Blumenthal note how the Rothschild encampment chose its location to resonate with the Zionist narrative. Yet veteran Mizrahi activists set up an alternative camp near the “New” central station, amidst piss poor residents, emaciated sex workers, Sudanese refugees and foreign laborers, picking a pre 1948 Arab-Jewish neighborhood destroyed by Zionist “development” as a counter-historical symbol of the crushing brutality and racism of Zionism in Tel Aviv itself. The authors apparently were in Tel Aviv, so why not interview activists who specifically decided against joining the Rothschild camp? Dana is Israeli and Blumenthal is American. Why is it that the only Israel they notice, the only people they care to ask for their opinion, even if only to dismiss them, are the Ashkenazi middle class of Tel Aviv? Is it because these are the people in Israel who are most like themselves?
Then there is the question of expectations. They challenge the idea that this protest movement could "initiate a process that will eventually lead to the unraveling of the occupation and discrimination against Palestinians." There are no doubt those in Israel, as well as in the world, who want to see Israelis leading the movement for Palestinian liberation. It is therefore essential to repeat a thousand times. Only a Palestinian led movement can liberate Palestinians. Besides, Palestinians have already initiated that process. So there is nothing for #J14 to initiate. But unless the Palestinian strategy involves new weapons coming out of science fiction movies, changing Israeli consciousness is going to be part of the struggle and part of the victory. That cannot happen overnight. It will be a process. Nor can it happen of itself. Activists are going to be an essential ingredient, and they will have to have strategies of engaging with that process that is going to be messy and often unpleasant. Israelis cannot see the occupation. That some of them might be able to see the state’s war against the Bedouins, perhaps for the first time, matters. That’s what a process means. This by no means implies that the process has a predetermined direction. On the contrary, the odds are bad, all the exits are in the wrong direction, and it would take both labor and luck to steer it anywhere better. Radical left activists in Israel only stand a chance of succeeding to turn their society around if BDS succeeds in the West and if the Arab revolutions really fulfill their promises, which is far from guaranteed. These different tracks impact each other even if they are not communicating with each other. This is what the petulant keyboard brigadiers like Yossi Gurvits, who whine about lacking “solidarity,” don’t understand, that what the left in Israel (the real left) needs most, is not a pat on the back, but our success in all the struggles that relate to Israel. On the other hand, it could probably do without being criticized for not staying home and watching TV.
This post originally appeared on Jews Sans Frontieres.
Why is it that the only Israel they notice, the only people they care to ask for their opinion, even if only to dismiss them, are the Ashkenazi middle class of Tel Aviv? Is it because these are the people in Israel who are most like themselves?
It is because they are dishonest. They don’t act like real journalists, they pick and choose who they want to interview to get the reaction they want to transmit. They are propagandists, truth plays second fiddle.
Singling out Ashkenazi Jews in Israel, just to make them look bad is racist, pure and simple.
“Why is it that the only Israel they notice, the only people they care to ask for their opinion, even if only to dismiss them, are the Ashkenazi middle class of Tel Aviv? Is it because these are the people in Israel who are most like themselves?”–Gabriel Ash
“Singling out Ashkenazi Jews in Israel, just to make them look bad is racist, pure and simple.” –DBG
I think you missed the point here. Gabriel is saying that they interviewed people like themselves and should have looked at a much broader cross-section. You’re worried about the people they did interview. What makes any particular Israeli “look bad” regardless of their background is contempt or indifference to what Israel has been doing to Palestinians.
Anyway, the evils of Dana and Blumenthal aside, the central point of the article is this–
“But unless the Palestinian strategy involves new weapons coming out of science fiction movies, changing Israeli consciousness is going to be part of the struggle and part of the victory. That cannot happen overnight. It will be a process. Nor can it happen of itself. Activists are going to be an essential ingredient, and they will have to have strategies of engaging with that process that is going to be messy and often unpleasant.”
“But unless the Palestinian strategy involves new weapons coming out of science fiction movies, changing Israeli consciousness is going to be part of the struggle and part of the victory. That cannot happen overnight”
Israelis need a forced devaluation of their lifestyle. Instead of having 100% of everything produced in Erez Israel they need to get down to at least 70%.
Gaza is poor because Israelis are rich and the Gaza situation is unsustainable. This devaluation is going to hurt poor Israelis most because the poor always get shafted and especially so in the Jewish state. Many Israelis will leave. It is not about changing consciousness. Nobody gives up the benefits Israeli Jews have voluntarily. Not even the thoughtful lefty Ashkenazi types who watch foreign movies at the Jerusalem cinematheque.
“the poor always get shafted”
No argument there.
But why “and especially so in the Jewish state”?
Because so much money has been siphoned to the settlements and everything that goes to the settlers is money denied the people of Israel. They could have built a decent state with strong institutions and a comprehensive social net and instead they followed a childish fantasy.
I don’t know of any other rich country where the newspapers feature ads about hungry children.
link to yadeliezer.org
Feeling Like Every Kallah Should
Written on Sunday, Jun. 19, 2011. 6:49 AM
under Adopt-a-Wedding , Kol Kallah Bridal Fund
| by M. Baum
Last week, a young girl stood in Yad Eliezer’s main office and cried. With her wedding scheduled to take place in two weeks, Sara still did not have even the most basic items necessary to start a new home.
Her parents work hard to put food on the table for the family on a daily basis, and much as they would have liked, they were unable to give Sara any money to purchase what she needed for her upcoming wedding. With nowhere else to turn, Sara showed up at Yad Eliezer.
Thanks to the generosity of the Young Israel of Kew Gardens Hills, together we were able to provide Sara and her family with clothing for the wedding, as well as all of her needs in setting up her new home. Sara was able to enjoy her wedding day like every Kallah should, knowing she had what she needed to begin her new life.
i’ve been disappointed with the responses to the protests. do i wish there were 300,000 israelis protesting to end the occupation instead? sure, of course. but that is not to be. however whenever you get a mass movement (even if that movement is not entirely focused in the direction you want) it invites opportunity for change.
i don’t believe the occupation is going to come primarily because of an israeli motivated movement. i think the pressure from the outside (international) and within palestinian society is going be what pushes israel to change and that pressure is going to have more impact on an israel in fluidity, in motion. simply the presence of so much dialogue and the participation of palestinian israeli creates an opportunity.
anyway, i feel an alliance and bond with those in both israel and palestine who work tirelessly for freedom and it’s bothered me, the criticism of these protests have bothered me. if we want to empower change in the region we have to work with what’s there, not discount it as not enough time and again.
whatever. i am in the minority. 972 made a podcast on aug 17th called ‘The tent protests and beyond’. w/Dahlia Scheindlin, Dimi Reider, Aziz Abu Sarah and Joseph Dana, and host Noam Sheizaf. i was going to write something about it and within hrs the eilat attack happened and it seemed like a whirlwind swept everything away. but the podcast represents a variety of response and is worth the time to check out.
we shouldn’t be alienating the left in israel as not being effective enough. i know the protestors are not all ‘left’.
צדיקה בסדום
I thought that was your role here.
I felt that the Dana/Blumenthal article was amazingly disrespectful, an expression of “I know what’s important, you don’t”, the vanity of the elite revolutionary cadre.
I think the occupation will end really only with a change in Israeli hearts and minds, otherwise the political “leadership” have a different mandate from the people (morally right or wrong, rightly perceived or not).
The anti neo-liberal approach can bring down the Netanyahu regime, and any regime elected subsequently will have a more sympathetic attitude towards West Bank and Gazan Palestinians.
There three prevailing political options as to sequence and goal.
Under the two-state, there is either negotiation followed by legislative ratification followed by popular ratification in each community; or, declaration followed by either subsequent negotiation as to how-to’s (NO requirement for legislative or popular ratification, that is a basis of criticism of the UN declaration process).
Under the single state, there is acknowledgment of the need for plebiscite, then popular reconciliation and mutual sympathy, in order to avoid civil war.
The J14 movement is a post-occupation movement, in that it does regard the issues as relevant to “all of the citizens of the nation, a nation of its citizens”. It does pose the promise of subsequent non-Zionist (not anti) political parties organized around social issues.
“an expression of “I know what’s important, you don’t”, the vanity of the elite revolutionary cadre.”
You would know all about that attitude, certainly. Your post would be improved by leaving out the first few lines, which were amazingly disrespectful, as so many of your posts are.
Nobody knows which direction the J14 movement will go. I hope your optimism is warranted. Incidentally, though Gabriel Ash is guardedly optimistic, the details of his views seem quite different from yours.
“(NO requirement for legislative or popular ratification, that is a basis of criticism of the UN declaration process).”
I guess that pretty much invalidates Israel’s right to exist then. Did the Palestinians get to vote on it? There might be a basis for criticizing the UN approach–I’m not sure. But the reasons for the US and Israeli criticisms are most likely fear–they fear Palestinians acquiring legal rights in the international community that might have teeth. The US and Israel want to be in the driver’s seat, determining for themselves when or if the Palestinians will ever be allowed to have some kind of state.
Didn’t they update you? The Palestinian internationals (abunimah and friends) have decided that The UN approach is a trap invented by the “PA collaborators”. They will fight until the last drop of Palestinian blood … In the occupied territories.
The Palestinian internationals will sit thousands of miles away while they advocate for something the ‘real’ Palestinians don’t feel that strongly about.
“The Palestinian internationals (abunimah and friends) have decided that The UN approach is a trap invented by the “PA collaborators”. ”
I’ve heard. I don’t think they’re right–the US and Israel seem very upset, so it doesn’t sound like collaboration. Perhaps the PA might have cynical reasons for doing it. But I don’t know if there is evidence for this and I also don’t know how ordinary Palestinians in the WB feel about it.
And the only ones who can give informed comment on what “real palestinians” want are Zionist Jews.
Pull the other one.
Israel is slowly moving into the failure zone . What seemed rational for 40 years is exposed as lunacy.
Eventually, reality intrudes. Then the backlash comes. The “experts” are upended. We see the cost of not having an honest, open argument, whether about the settlement project or about how Israel’s relations with the outside world are managed and the media feel embarrassed: “How did we miss that?” In Washington, Tripoli, Cairo,. Tel Aviv and elsewhere, the answers are often the same. It comes down to unspoken deals between powerful people, and smiling faces telling fairytales
“Singling out Ashkenazi Jews in Israel, just to make them look bad is racist, pure and simple.”
Ashkenazi Jews are top of the food chain in Israel. 8 layers above the prisoners in Gaza. Zero self awareness and a rich source of amusement. If you don’t like racism, drop the Israel support.
maybe 50 years ago that was the case seafoid, but not anymore. it is fun to perpetuate that nonsense to help align w/ your narrative, but it isn’t the case.
Come off it, DBG.
Ashkenazi Jews are the elite. You can look at average income, education or child poverty. Anyway you like. Israel is a caste system with the Ashkenazis as Brahmins. Gaza has the untouchables.
Ashkenazi Jews are the elite. You can look at average income, education or child poverty. Anyway you like. Israel is a caste system with the Ashkenazis as Brahmins. Gaza has the untouchables.
According to this logic, the USA is a caste system with Whites as Brahamins and Blacks / Latin Americans as the lower castes. I promise you that a Mizrahi in Israel is much more likely to be rich than a black guy in America.
Tal, honey
Upper caste Ashkenazim and Mizrahim are forbidden by Israeli law from intermarriage with the Gazan untouchables. You can dress it up in Jewish ceremonial robes and surround it with incense smoke but that is a caste system.
wow, you are reaching seafoid. what is with you guys and analogies that don’t quite fit?
Are you saying Gazans are Israelis now?
Forbidden by Israeli law? that is misleading at best and probably just an outright lie.
DBG
Look up your Israeli law, habibi.
You can try to put Maybelline on that Israeli snout but I won’t buy it.
Do you know that Israelis are forbidden by law from marrying West Bankers and Gazans and bringing them to Israel ?
Do you know what happened to Tali Fahima ?
seafoid, sweetie
There is no such a law. This is regular anti-Zionist Hasbara bullshit.
tal, the israeli nationality law is an apartheid law. non jewish israelis cannot marry West Bankers and Gazans and bring them into israel to live unless granted permission by the state which is very rare.
Social justice may mean different things, and so far, J14 is vague at best from what I have read.
Given a limited size of pie to divide, you can enlarge your part in several ways, one being cutting the portion that incorrect people (like Arabs) are getting. Israeli right wing is not like American right wing, most are all for nanny state as long as correct people receive the goodies, and some already joined the movement. Nationalism and socialism can be combined, was combined and will be combined, and all too often the results are not pretty (Haredi parties are basically Communist as long as Haredi are on the receiving end, to use a very mild example.)
More to the point, a very prominent (well, somewhat prominent) voice in Israel for the need of “social justice first, before other issues” is Shelly Yachimovich, perhaps the next leader of Labor Party. For quite a while she just did not say what her views on “other issues” are. Now we know: settlements in West Bank are OK provided that they have adequate preschools, mass transit etc. Should a massive expansion of settlements be a way of solving housing shortage? A number of ministers demands exactly that. And what “J14 leaders” say?
Mind you, occupied territories are very attractive: no pesky communities objecting to any acre (or dunum) of rezoned land or every mile of a new road. Investments are much faster if you can cut the red tape. Conversely, expanding housing opportunities for Israeli Arabs cannot but decrease the amount available to Jews.
Or consider this: can Israel preserve its strongly Jewish character and have cheap dairy products? Opening new farms employing mostly the cheapest labor possible (which would probably be Arab) and letting non-kosher sections in supermarkets could be one way. This is how we have cheap dairy products in USA (well, not that ARABS work on the farms, but our economic equivalent).
(Perhaps we could get cheaper humus and pistachio nuts in USA if we imported from cheaper ME countries. But this is not a social justice issue here, yet.)
Thanks for bringing attention to the concerns of Mizrahi and Palestinian groups in Israeli society.
I’ve often noticed the blindness to Mizrahi concerns in my interactions with European and American Israelis and Jews. I would have thought that the emphasis on Jewish experience/identity/nationhood in Israel would have eradicated the sense of difference between eastern and western Jews but I think that it shows even within a common ethnoreligious affilation, race and class are still sources of stratification and that those in the dominant race/class (like anywhere else) don’t ‘see’ others sections of society – they are objects rather than subjects. And if the Mizrahi are not subject then what are the Palestinians, who don’t even belong to the same enthnoreligious group? They are not ascribed agency either and are patronized by those who wish to save/redeem them to preserve the self-image of the ‘good Israeli’. The cognitive dissonance associated with the oppressor being the saviour does not seem to strike them.
Mizrahim are less likely to speak English and more likely to live in the peripheral areas to which they were shunted in the 50s. They are far superior to Palestinians but not as good as Ashkenazim. The love for Shas amongst the Tel Aviv crowd says a lot.
While Gabriel Ash suggests that Dana and Blumenthal see past Rothschilds Boulevard, perhaps Ash should also take a look outside of Tel Aviv at the “tent protests” in Palestinian villages and towns and how their politics differ from the Tel Aviv protests and why…
Abir Kopty explains the difference link to abirkopty.wordpress.com
The boundaries of July 14 by Abir Kopty
Although some Israelis are calling for making a clear connection to Israel’s occupation, the July 14 movement for “social justice” is far from endorsing a position on this, for many reasons.
First, July 14 is not a united movement. Over time, the Israeli neo-liberal and capitalist regime has increased individualism. In Tel Aviv boulevards, one can find tents identified with many different groups and issues and demands: single mothers, teachers, students, social workers, the disabled, pensioners, etc. Israel has not only built cement apartheid walls, it has also created many psychological barriers and walls between its own citizens
The movement is trying hard to be inclusive, from right to left, in fact. It is true that all these groups have come together and rallied, chanting, “the people want social justice”. But when it comes to forming a list of demands, the divergent groups raise different interests–in some cases even conflicting ones. Consequently, major effort is put into finding common ground and agreeing on joint demands rather than addressing historical injustices and structural change.
Second, Israelis separate between the “social” and the “political”. Many people who are taking part in the movement keep repeating “the struggle is not political”. This will prevent many from questioning state priorities, which certainly entails questioning its politics. Furthermore, this mantra, along with the general inclusiveness, makes settlers, who are trampling on Palestinian rights on a daily basis, feel included. But this, of course, is political not social.
Third, the left in Israel (especially the non-Zionist left) has been delegitimized. The Israeli left is now labeled as “haters of Israel” after massive systematic campaigning by the right wing, backed by political parties like the Likud and supported by a wide range of organizations promoting the rightist agenda. The protesters of July 14 do not want to be affiliated or labeled as “anti-Israel extremists”.
Finally, Israeli protestors are not calling for the fall of the regime, as did protestors in Arab countries. If they were, I am not sure Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the state security apparatuses would be as tolerant. Netanyahu and Israeli “hasbara” (roughly “propaganda” in Hebrew) will do their utmost to distinguish Israeli democracy and freedom of speech from neighboring oppressive and criminal Arab regimes. Israelis remain eager to celebrate their democracy, and continue to deny their state’s lack of democracy or tolerance when it comes to Palestinians.
These Israeli limits are well known to the Palestinian community within Israel. This is why our reaction took some time. Currently, there are many Arab/Palestinian encampments in major towns like Nazareth, Baqa al-Gharabiya, Sakhnin, Arrabeh, Haifa, Jaffa, Led, Hurfeich, Yerka, Majd al-Krom, Qalansaweh, Um al-Fahem, Jaljuliya, al-Alaraqib and more.
These demonstrators did not go to Tel Aviv’s boulevards but decided to set up their own tents in Palestinian towns and neighborhoods. In Tel Aviv, the protests are about housing. For Palestinians, it is about house demolitions and land grabs. In Tel Aviv, protests are about the high price of apartments; for Palestinians, it is about the lack of housing and planning. In Tel Aviv, protests are about “cottage cheese”; for Palestinians, it is about the 60 percent of children living under the poverty line.
The discourse in the Palestinian tents is totally different than that in the Tel Aviv tents. Occupation and historical injustices are on the table, the connection between the social and political is very clear, and the demands are the same in Sakhnin, Nazareth, Haifa, Um al-Fahem, Jaffa or the Naqab: they are collective, not individual.
In addition, these encampments are a great opportunity to bring together Palestinian youth and mobilize them. Most tents offer different cultural and political activities–from demonstrations to lectures on planning and housing to commemorations for poet Mahmoud Darwish, film screenings, and musical events.
Many tents have even managed to bring together the various parties and political movements that represent the Palestinian community to cooperate and mobilize, which is in itself a blessing. Many tents have engaged Jewish activists, which creates an alternative and challenges the existing structure of separation.
To summarize, most Palestinians are choosing to bring their voice to this movement and not isolate themselves. July 14 is an opportunity for Palestinians to organize and motivate themselves. It will not, however, bring the change Palestinians seek. Our struggle did not start today; it started before 1948 and will probably continue after July 14.
July 14 has created opportunities for activism that the Israeli regime has worked long and hard to prevent. People have come together, and this is already power. Yet this movement will not go beyond the Zionist boundaries; it might achieve concrete demands, but it will not change the dominant social, economic and political structures. It won’t do so until it addresses the injustice underway since 1948 and comes to terms with Friedrich Engels’ famous saying: “A nation cannot become free and at the same time continue to oppress other nations.”