Imagine if this article was about whites and blacks in the US

Israel/Palestine
on 62 Comments

From Israel Hayom, the largest daily circulation newspaper in Israel:

Demographic optimism in the new year

By Yoram Ettinger

On the eve of the Jewish New Year 5772, the Jewish fertility rate of 2.97 births per woman exceeds the fertility rates in most Arab countries.

In defiance of conventional wisdom, Israeli Jewish fertility has been robust — primarily due to a surge in secular Jewish birth rate — while in the Muslim world rapid modernization has led to a sharp decline, down to 1.7 births per woman in Iran, 2.8 in Jordan, 2.5 in Egypt, 2.5 in most Persian Gulf states (except for Saudi Arabia, with 4 births per woman), and 1.9 in North Africa.

Since the 1940s, Israel’s demographers have maintained that Jews are doomed to become a minority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and that it is incumbent on the Jewish state to concede Jewish geography (Judea and Samaria) in order to secure Jewish demography.

In fact, Professor Roberto Bacchi, the founder of the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics and the mentor of contemporary Israeli statisticians and demographers, projected in 1948 that by 2001 there would be no more than 2.3 million Jews in Israel — a 33% minority west of the Jordan River.

However, all demographic prophecies of doom have crashed on the rocks of reality. West of the Jordan River (in the combined area of Judea and Samaria and pre-1967 Israel), Jews have gone from a minority of 8 percent in 1900 and 33% in 1947 to a solid majority of 66% in 2011, comprising almost six million people. The current demographic tailwind should further expand the Jewish majority.

From 80,400 births in 1995, the number of Jewish births surged by 56% to 125,500 in 2010, while the annual number of Israeli Arab births stabilized due to their successful integration into Israel’s infrastructures of health, education, employment, finance, medicine, politics, sports and the arts. Israel’s Jewish-Arab fertility gap was reduced from six births per woman in 1969 to 0.5 in 2011, trending toward a convergence at three births per woman.

In 2011, the number of Arabs in Judea and Samaria is inflated by almost 1 million people (1.6 million, not 2.55 million) through the inclusion of nearly 400,000 overseas residents who have been away for more than a year, and by a double-count of 350,000 ID card-carrying Jerusalem and West Bank Arabs who are counted as Israeli Arabs by Israel and as West Bank residents by the Palestinian Authority. A September 2006 study by the World Bank documents a 32% inflation in the number of Palestinian births.

West Bank Arab fertility is declining faster than it is among Israeli Arabs, resulting from an accelerated urbanization process (from a 70% rural society in 1967 to a 78% urban society in 2011), an expanded education and career mentality among women, reduced teen pregnancy, institutionalized family planning, and other factors.

In addition, Judea and Samaria Arabs have experienced an annual net-emigration since 1950 (16,500 in 2010, 17,000 in 2009 and 17,000 in 2008). At the same time, Jews have experienced annual net-immigration (aliyah) since 1882, boosted by periodical waves of aliyah, in defiance of Israel’s demographic establishment. For example, during the 1980s, Israel’s demographic profession underestimated the number of Soviet Jews by 50%, stating that no massive aliyah was expected, even if Moscow opened its gates. More than 1 million olim (immigrants) nevertheless arrived.

An 80% Jewish majority in the combined area of the West Bank and pre-1967 Israel is attainable by 2035 in light of the current demographic trend, bolstered by a unique aliyah potential of 50,000 olim annually. It requires Jerusalem to declare aliyah the top national priority, leveraging the relative strength of the Israeli economy, whose credit rating was recently upgraded by the Standard & Poor agency — the intensified anti-Semitism in the former Soviet Union, Western Europe and Argentina, and expanded Jewish education in the U.S.

Anyone claiming that Jews are doomed to become a minority west of the Jordan River and that, therefore, the Jewish state must concede Jewish geography in order to secure Jewish demography, is either dramatically mistaken or outrageously misleading.

About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

62 Responses

  1. Dan Crowther
    September 29, 2011, 2:35 pm

    No hat tip to Max Blumenthal’s twitter account?

  2. NorthOfFortyNine
    September 29, 2011, 2:52 pm

    >> re question as to whether the “Jewish state must concede Jewish geography Jewish geography in order to secure Jewish demography.”

    Unbelievable. Adam asks how this would go over it it had been in reference to Blacks in the US. Another thought experiment asks after a reaction should it have been about Jews and admission to Waspy clubs or New England grad schools. To wit, an update from the Dean of Admission: “It appears, based on incoming applications, that Jews are declining as a proportion of overall enrollment. We find this an encouraging trend, obviating the need to take more definitive measures to ensure ethnic balance at our school.”

    eee once said he agreed with the maxim that what was good for the goose is also good for the gander. I agree. -N49.

  3. mhuizenga
    September 29, 2011, 3:32 pm

    “Imagine if this article was about whites and blacks in the US”

    Yeah, I know. I’ve started using a new method to clear my mind of the MSM and neocon bias in the articles I read online. I just interchange the words “Palestinians” and “Jews/Israel” in the articles. The prejudice is so very clear after you try this. Very enlightening and disturbing!

    • Citizen
      September 29, 2011, 5:12 pm

      Try interchanging Obama’s recent very positive words to the Libyan people (written by his handlers of course) by substituting “Palestinian people” where he says “Libyan people” in one way or another. Would have been a completely different Obama speech @ UN GA. Makes me want to puke. Wonder what Obama’s mother would say about his disregard of Palestinians in behalf Israel? She, pure white, always identified with the oppressed. Obama even implied she was naive for doing so. He does not see the connection, does not have the imagination or empathy to see that if his own mother had his mentality he would never have been born.

      • mhuizenga
        September 29, 2011, 6:02 pm

        I did this at a recent article at Commentary. What a difference. Where the subject of a sentence is “the Palestinians” almost invariably the verb will be something like “hate” or “refuse” while adjectives are usually along the lines of “unreasonable.” Really, when I changed the word from Palestinians to Israel, the article looked like Nazi propaganda. It’s subtle until you actually paste the article into a doc like I did (just for kicks) and do a replace.

        Granted Commentary has a definite slant and agenda, but this kind of subtle word play by the media is insidious and part of the problem. People who don’t follow the situation very closely are affected by it. I was, and I follow it fairly closely. Thank goodness there are sites like this.

      • seafoid
        October 1, 2011, 11:01 am

        I’ll try that !

        Dickerson posted a very interesting link the other day

        ) I urge every person on this planet to watch Yoav Shamir’s Defamation, a documentary about anti-Semitism…
        …He provides us with some intimate footage of Israeli youth being indoctrinated into collective anxiety and total neurosis just before they join the IDF.
        The general image we are left with is no less than grotesque. The film elaborates on the aggressive vulgar orchestrated amplification of fear amongst Israelis and Zionist Jews. “We are raised to believe that we are hated” says an Israeli high school girl on her way to a concentration camp…
        …Shamir provides us with an opportunity to see how badly young Israelis behave once in Poland. You watch their contempt to the local population and disrespect to Polish people and institutes. You can also watch Israelis project their hatred onto others. For some reason they are convinced that everyone out there is as merciless as they happen to be. The Israeli youngsters are saturated with fear, yet, they are having a good time, you can watch them having a party dancing in a bus all the way to a Auschwitz…
        “Defamation”on YouTube (in 9 parts) – http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Defamation+qsdfgh84

  4. Henry Norr
    September 29, 2011, 3:43 pm

    Interesting. This info will probably help the “Greater Israel” forces vs. those who’ve supported a two-state solution (or better, endless discussion thereof) as a way of avoiding the “demographic timebomb” (=a Palestinian majority).

    • lysias
      September 29, 2011, 4:17 pm

      It may well be connected with the increasingly voiced idea of Israel annexing the West Bank.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        September 29, 2011, 6:23 pm

        It may well be connected with the increasingly voiced idea of Israel annexing the West Bank.

        Yes. There is a grab-it-now movement afoot. I think you are right — this is part n parcel. -N49.

  5. Shmuel
    September 29, 2011, 3:49 pm

    “The unintelligent say: There are too many of us. The intelligent reply: There are too few of us. That the strength of peoples in possession of sufficient territory lies in their numbers goes without saying. But that is also where the strength of peoples that do not possess sufficient territory lies, if they know how to apply their minds and muscles to conquering it. Conquering it for themselves at home, using every free hand, skilfully clearing and cultivating it, or conquering it for themselves abroad, wherever empty land abounds.”

    Benito Mussolini, 26 March 1926

    From Matteo Mazzoni, “Per un’Italia sempre più “grande”. Demografia e potere: politiche pronataliste e rappresentazioni di genere durante il Ventennio fascista” [“For an ever ‘greater’ Italy.” Demography and power: Pronatalist policies and gender representations during the Fascist Period]
    http://www.demolab.org/testi/8DemografiaFascismo.pdf

  6. James
    September 29, 2011, 3:51 pm

    i had heard that the birth rate for orthodox jews in israel was way up… one doesn’t have to imagine the types of politicians they will continue to elect..

    this article is from the us
    “Not only do the Orthodox suffer many fewer losses from intermarriage, but their fertility rate is far above the Jewish norm. As against the overall average of 1.86 children per Jewish woman, an informed estimate gives figures ranging upward from 3.3 children in “modern Orthodox” families to 6.6 in Haredi or “ultra-Orthodox” families to a whopping 7.9 in families of Hasidim. These numbers are, of course, difficult to pin down definitively, but anecdotal evidence is compelling. In a single year, according to a nurse at one hospital in the Lakewood, New Jersey area serving a right-wing Orthodox population, 1,700 babies were born to 5,500 local families, yielding a rate of 358 births per thousand women. (The overall American rate is 65 births per thousand women.)
    http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/jews-and-jewish-birthrate/
    the info appears to be from about 10 years ago..

    • RoHa
      September 29, 2011, 8:42 pm

      “Not only do the Orthodox suffer many fewer losses from intermarriage”

      losses from intermarriage”

      Now there is a revealing phrase.

      • eee
        September 30, 2011, 1:36 am

        Yes, losses. If someone believe having a Jewish community is good, then assimilation is a loss. What is more revealing is that you don’t think a Jewish community is anything worthwhile.

      • Citizen
        September 30, 2011, 8:45 pm

        eee, if someone believes having a humanistic community is good, then a Jewish community is a loss? If someone believes in universal morality, then Jewish morality is a loss? What is most revealing is that you don’t think a community based on equal rights for all under law is anything worthwhile. Clearly you don’t like the American way of life. You are spiritual kin to the Americans who move to Israeli settlements from places like Brooklyn. Also, spiritual kin to David Duke and his friends here in the USA. Res ipsa loquitur.

      • RoHa
        October 1, 2011, 12:03 am

        Part 2.

        If if if if if if if the Jewish community actually really is such a community, then the sooner it vanishes through assimilation, the better for all of us.

      • annie
        October 1, 2011, 12:35 am

        Roha, i don’t want the jewish community to vanish. i am really not seeing the upside of that happening vs the opportunity to work this mess out. the jewish community is not defined by this temporary space in time merged w/zionism. it is an incredible community and very much worth keeping in our sphere of cultures. i’ve noticed you’ve made this point before but i don’t understand completely. do you wish ethnicities should vanish? or just the jewish ethinicity? let’s please not define jewishness by zionism’s disgrace. if a community rejects something then fix it, don’t advocate for it’s demise. there are too many good things about this collective group to ever wish for ‘vanish’. can we not go there please?

      • john h
        October 1, 2011, 12:40 am

        I echo your sentiments, annie.

        “let’s please not define jewishness by zionism’s disgrace. if a community rejects something then fix it, don’t advocate for its demise. there are too many good things about this collective group to ever wish for ‘vanish’.”

      • eee
        October 1, 2011, 12:47 am

        Annie,

        Once you start down the track you are going the inevitable conclusion will be that Jews should disappear. That is the “logical” conclusion of your radical and extremist positions.

        How many times do we have to hear on this blog:
        1) Jews are not a nation
        2) There is an irreconcilable difference between Zionism and liberal democracy
        3) Jews should not see assimilation as being bad

        before you realize that what people here really want is the Jews disappearing? You say you do not want the Jews to disappear and I believe you. You also say the Jews can have a state just not in Palestine. Where then?

      • RoHa
        October 1, 2011, 1:34 am

        ” i don’t want the jewish community to vanish”

        Did you see the “if”?

        “do you wish ethnicities should vanish?”

        I don’t see any point in maintaining ethnically based “communities”.

        “let’s please not define jewishness by zionism’s disgrace.”

        Tell that to eee.

      • annie
        October 1, 2011, 1:37 am

        You also say the Jews can have a state just not in Palestine.

        i do not recall ever saying that. jews have states all over the world. right here in america jews have states in california, new york, pennsylvania, arizona, Massachusetts and the list goes on and on. should i start w/all the places in europe?

        Where then?

        common sense dictates you do not create an exclusive ethnic state where there’s already millions of other (indigenous) people you are not including. perhaps zionist jews are not gifted with common sense. but to answer your question..didn’t the bush family recently acquire some land in uraguay as large as israel? how should i know. where there’s a will there’s a way, your team just went for the hottest real estate on the planet. coincidence? i don’t think so.

      • RoHa
        October 1, 2011, 1:44 am

        Incidentally, somehow part 2 comes before part 1 in the thread. Taking them in the correct order might help.

      • Hostage
        October 1, 2011, 2:18 am

        Once you start down the track you are going the inevitable conclusion will be that Jews should disappear.

        Oh the poor little hasbrats. If we criticize dysfunctional aspects of Zionist apartheid society they will all turn to dust and cease to exist, because Zionism is Judaism.

        If we find the unscientific, racist, and misogynist claptrap in the sixth century Talmud or 16th century Shulchan Aruch, & etc. repulsive (and the basis for some of the excesses of the Zionist movements), they will cease to exist because there is no other valid Jewish view on matters of spirituality, philosophy, science, art, music, or literature (not).

      • john h
        October 1, 2011, 4:18 am

        “How many times do we have to hear on this blog:
        1) Jews are not a nation”

        Just as many times as people like you say Jews are a nation. I’ll say it again, Jews are not a nation.

        Israel is a nation, which in 1948 declared “the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic”. Israeli, not Jewish, passports are required to leave and enter Israel; they refer to “the State of Israel”.

        “You also say the Jews can have a state just not in Palestine.”

        Who knows who, if anyone, said that, but it wasn’t annie.

      • RoHa
        October 2, 2011, 8:30 am

        “common sense dictates you do not create an exclusive ethnic state where there’s already millions of other (indigenous) people you are not including.”

        Annie, when you phrase it like that, it does sound like the sort of plan we associate with slack-jawed yokels and copious amounts of beer.

      • annie
        October 2, 2011, 9:54 am

        If someone believe having a Jewish community is good, then assimilation is a loss.

        eee, most people understand ethnicity to be a combination of shared cultural attributes. when intermarriage occurs in communities this often creates an opportunity for the community to expand, seen as a good thing. not always but often. there is nothing inherent in being part of a community that demands exclusiveness from outsiders.

        what’s clear is you, and others who think like you, believe that assimilation is a net loss for the jewish community because you believe it weakens your community. but you must remember not everyone has your standards. if someone said to me assimilating with jews weakened my community and would be a loss for my community i would think they were an anti semite. iow, i judge others by my own standards.

        if someone wanted to live in a nice gated community down the street with no jews i wouldn’t think it would be ok.

        people define others by their own judgements or limitations. because you believe assimilation is a loss and you believe it will mean your community will vanish then you assume someone who advocates assimilation wants your community to vanish. but you cannot impose your own belief system on another or draw conclusions of others intent based on your own limitations.

      • Citizen
        October 2, 2011, 10:04 am

        Maybe he’s got a point when you consider how assimilation of Israeli thought has weakened America’s values at home and abroad?

      • RoHa
        October 1, 2011, 12:02 am

        The moderators just won’t let me say what I have to say. Clearly they don’t understand the implications of “if”.

        I’ll try breaking this into two parts, and see whether I can get it past them that way.

        Part 1.

        A community which calls intermarriage a “loss” is a community which rejects humanity.

        (Anything wrong with saying that, moderators?)

      • eee
        October 1, 2011, 12:33 am

        Glad to know that you think Judaism is a community that rejects humanity.

      • RoHa
        October 1, 2011, 1:42 am

        “Glad to know that you think Judaism is a community that rejects humanity.”

        That’s the way Jewishness (as distinct from the religion Judaism) seems to me, as a non-Jew. Even more so when intermarriage is called a “loss”.

        I’m waiting to be persuaded that I am wrong.

        People like Mooser, who clearly thinks that being human is more important than being Jewish, are a good argument against me.

        People like you, who seem to think that Jews should always remain separate from the rest of humanity, are not.

      • annie
        October 1, 2011, 2:01 am

        Even more so when intermarriage is called a “loss”.

        this reminds me of days long passed when children born out of wedlock were called ‘illegitimate’. crazy talk,

      • Hostage
        October 1, 2011, 2:38 am

        Even more so when intermarriage is called a “loss”.

        this reminds me of days long passed when children born out of wedlock were called ‘illegitimate’. crazy talk,

        What about children of prohibited unions like Senator Cohen? I believe he was considered a mamzer because his parents were married.

      • Cliff
        October 1, 2011, 3:46 am

        eee,

        It is clear to everyone that you’re a very small person. You hate non-Jews and your narcissism rejects humanity for non-Jews.

  7. seafoid
    September 29, 2011, 3:59 pm

    Israel is like a company that has to grow its balance sheet by 5% exponentially. The original company was Ashkenazi, the best. Their party was Mapai and they were unbeatable. Smart, organized, you name it. But the balance sheet was weak so they merged it with the Sephardim although they retained voting control. The Sephardim were ignorant and backward and most of them spoke Arabic FFS so the transformation costs were massive but after 30 years they had the existential fear and things were great. Until 1977 and the bastards took over. Out with Mapai/Labor and in with the Likud tea party. The outcome was Lebanon 1982.
    After this the balance sheet looked weak again so the country turned towards the wombs of its Orthodox women to drive growth. At the start back in 1948 there were very few Orthodox so the P&L account could absorb whatever extra spending went their way. As their population grew they needed housing and so they filled the settlements of the West Bank with their broods. There was always money to build them houses and the land was free. And nothing could possibly go wrong.
    Meanwhile the cold war ended and the balance sheet looked like it needed another boost to deal with increased competition and it came in the form of a takeover bid for the Russian “Jews”. Not even Jewish most of them but who cares? They bring new skills into the company and the economy booms. For a while. But they demand voting rights and before you know it they have a foreign minister. And he has 9 Turks killed on the Mavi Marmara and loses the embassies in Turkey, Egypt and Jordan. Great work, Avi!
    And now the balance sheet is 6 times bigger than it was in 1948. And nobody is in charge. And the question is which risk will explode first.

    • NorthOfFortyNine
      September 29, 2011, 4:22 pm

      That’s a brilliant analogy, SF. -N49.

    • Dan Crowther
      September 29, 2011, 4:42 pm

      Bernie Madoff (sitting in prison): Sheeeit, you think I was running a Ponzi scheme?

    • Citizen
      September 29, 2011, 5:19 pm

      Israel is always copying Nazi Germany. I really don’t get how the chattering class can ignore this. This subject is just one of many examples, both in ideas and policy, some of them touched upon here regularly at MW because they are so obvious. German females received the Mother’s Cross for breeding babies–it came in plain, gold, and silver assets, depending on how many babies were born for the 3rd Reich from any single pure Aryan female. Those crosses are very collectible these day…

  8. annie
    September 29, 2011, 5:23 pm

    i don’t believe him. Israeli Jewish fertility has been robust — primarily due to a surge in secular Jewish birth rate

    everyone knows the fastest growing jewish demographic is the religious settlers with their 10 kids.

    second part i don’t believe: in 2011, the number of Arabs in Judea and Samaria is inflated by almost 1 million people (1.6 million, not 2.55 million)

  9. ToivoS
    September 29, 2011, 7:41 pm

    If there are 1 million Israelis living abroad and with dual citizenship are they counted in this census? I know they do not vote, but are they counted in the numbers mentioned here?

  10. pabelmont
    September 29, 2011, 7:43 pm

    As to demographics, I don’t get it. Israel is deporting Palestinians and breaking up families on an industrial scale. The mistreatment ought to mean that many Palestinians will “seep away” if they can get permission to live elsewhere, SUMUD or no SUMUD.

    And what does demographic ratio mean anyhow? Israel is perfectly happy to rule over a majority of non-Jews, doesn’t bother them a bit. A proposed law if enacted will (somehow) rule that where there is a conflict in Israel between “democracy” and “Jewish State”, “Jewish state” will win, and this rule would seem perfect fro removing the vote from non-Jews.

    So what do the numbers mean? Well, one thing they mean is that WATER will get shorter and shorter for Palestinians as more and more is grabbed by the increasing (and comparatively overwhelmingly water-wasteful) population of Israelis.

    How could Israel give up the West Bank if that meant giving up the West Bank’s aquifer (even if Israeli oil FRACKING trashes it)?

  11. Hostage
    September 29, 2011, 8:27 pm

    Yawn, it’s yet another pathetic propaganda piece about demographics by poor old Yoram Ettinger. I can’t ever read one of them without humming along to the tune to Monty Python’s Every Sperm is Sacred. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8

  12. eee
    September 30, 2011, 1:35 am

    If demographics are not important why did Arafat say that the Palestinian woman’s womb was his best weapon?

    If demographics are not important why did Palestinians worry and still sorry about Jewish immigration to the areas of mandatory Palestine?

    I thought what is good for the goose should be good for the gander, no?

    • eee
      September 30, 2011, 1:40 am

      And what about “white flight” in the US? The fact that Americans do not talk about demographics does not mean they do not care about it. In fact, American communities are segregated according to income and wealth, but since that is highly correlated with race in the US, there is race segregation. That is how in the state of New Jersey, that is usually ranked the 1st or second richest state, you have Camden, the poorest city in the US. And of course, its population is mostly African Americans and Hispanics. No, demographics do not matter. Only in Israel.

      • petersz
        September 30, 2011, 6:26 pm

        It’s a criminal offence for a realtor in the USA to give racial profiling of a geographic area to a potential home buyer. In other words if a buyer says “I want to live in area where there are absolutely no Blacks” if the realtor answers affirmatively he commits a felony. No problem in apartheid Israel of course you have Jewish only roads, Jewish only colonies, Jewish National Fund land for Jews only and the new racist Admissions Committee Law equivalent to the Group Areas Act that was passed in South Africa in the dark days of apartheid.

      • Citizen
        September 30, 2011, 8:54 pm

        eee, yes communities are segregated via income and wealth in the USA, even as between wealthy and even wealthier communities. The wealthier you are in the USA, the more choices you have where to live; the really wealthy can live anywhere without regard to race, ethnicity, creed, or color–and they do. And it is a violation of law to condition where one can live on race, ethnicity, color, or creed. Such a violator and all aiders and abettors are subject to both civil and criminal law everywhere in the USA. Jewish Americans were in the forefront of creating such legislation.

    • Hostage
      September 30, 2011, 1:48 am

      eee, demographics are important, that’s why poor old Yoram Ettinger has been trying to discredit reports from scholarly and official sources that he doesn’t like for a long, long time now.

      For example, a demographic study by Hebrew University demographer Sergio DellaPergola, found that Jews, as defined according to the Interior Ministry’s criteria, now represent slightly less than 50 percent of the total population of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. “If people ask when Jews will lose their majority,” DellaPergola was quoted as saying, referring to the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan, “then it’s already happened.” See Auschwitz borders are here http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/auschwitz-borders-are-here-1.328550

      • eee
        September 30, 2011, 2:16 am

        Pergolla is wrong on two counts.
        1) The people in Gaza are not a demographic issue any more. For all practical purposes they are the same as the millions in Egypt.
        2) He over estimates the number of Arabs in the West Bank as Ettinger explains. The IDF knows much better how many Arabs there are in the West Bank and that is where Ettinger gets his info. The IDF has records of all Palestinians leaving and entering plus detailed info about each village and town.

        And by the way, just as leaving Gaza improved the demographic situation for Jews dramatically, there will be similar moves in the West Bank if the Palestinians keep on with the unilateral moves.

      • Hostage
        September 30, 2011, 2:45 am

        The people in Gaza are not a demographic issue any more . . .And by the way, just as leaving Gaza improved the demographic situation for Jews dramatically, there will be similar moves in the West Bank if the Palestinians keep on with the unilateral moves.

        “I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” — George C. Wallace

        The brave talk coming out of Israel sounds exactly the same to me. I’ve heard it all before from Portuguese Angola, Portuguese Mozambique, Rhodesia, Southwest Africa, and South Africa.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        September 30, 2011, 3:59 am

        And by the way, just as leaving Gaza improved the demographic situation for Jews dramatically, there will be similar moves in the West Bank if the Palestinians keep on with the unilateral moves.

        You can’t help but out do yourself, eee. So, like, if the natives don’t shape up and get real, Operation Bantustan, Phase II, gets the nod. Am I feelin’ you? –N49.

      • eee
        September 30, 2011, 10:13 am

        You can call national aspirations “segregation” until the cows come home. It won’t make it so. What the Flemish in Belgium want, what the people of South Sudan want, what almost 50% of the people in Quebec want, what the Slovaks want, what the Serbians, Croats, Bosnians, Slovenians want is a state of their own, not “segregation”. And that is exactly what Jews want, yet you fault us for it.

      • Talkback
        September 30, 2011, 12:41 pm

        You didn’t have a seperate territory on your own. You weren’t just living in a region called Judenland, which simply wanted to seperate from the main land. You were living mixed with Nonjews in Palestine, split up the main territory against the will of the majority, acquired more than half of it by war, expelled most of the Nonjewish majority – who should be citizens of your state according to resolution 181, international and human right law – and keep them expelled/segregated till today.

        And yes. One can fault you for it!

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        September 30, 2011, 1:34 pm

        You can call national aspirations “segregation” until the cows come home. It won’t make it so. What … almost 50% of the people in Quebec want, what the Slovaks want, … , is a state of their own, not “segregation”. And that is exactly what Jews want, yet you fault us for it.

        I can speak to you about Quebec, for I know this very well, and it was during my time in Quebec that I developed my antipathy towards nationalism of all stripes.

        I don’t have time to do this now. It is a much longer post. Maybe I will send something to Adam and Phil: “The Wandering Goy: How I became an anti-tribalist.”

        But in the meantime, let me leave you with this nugget: the segment most opposed to Quebec Nationalism was the Jewish community. And pretty much vice versa. That is to say: tribalists don’t get along with each other. Whereas the rest of us generally do.

        Which world would you rather live in? -N49.

      • Potsherd2
        September 30, 2011, 1:52 pm

        I fault you for taking it by force from the rightful owners, not for wanting it.

      • eee
        September 30, 2011, 1:54 pm

        So what if the Jewish community was against secession of Quebec? What exactly is your point?

        As for which world I would rather live in, I would rather live in the real world and control my own destiny.

      • eee
        September 30, 2011, 1:57 pm

        Talkback,

        Yeah right. You start a civil war, you better be sure you can win it. The Palestinians chose war following the partition and paid a price.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        September 30, 2011, 3:26 pm

        So what if the Jewish community was against secession of Quebec? What exactly is your point?

        My point? A world full of tribalists is a world that does not get along.

        There is also the hypocrisy: Jews tend to be for tribalism when it suits them (Israel) but against it when it does not (eg. Quebec.) There is a real stench to that. You can’t have your country but we demand ours.

        In Goose-Gander terms, you have to ask the question as to whether Jews would support Israel if it meant Jews elsewhere were treated like Israel treats its non-Jews.

        How good an idea is Israel if it were to mean putting a wall around St. Urbain Street and forcing the Jewish residents there to shuttle through checkpoints to enter and leave, so long as their paperwork was in order? And if they complained? Or sought redress from the UN? We threaten to do the same with Outrement.

        In your tribal mind, eee, this is perfectly alright.

        Such is the hypocrisy of tribalism. -N49.

      • Talkback
        September 30, 2011, 4:20 pm

        eee,

        there was no partition out of the blue, only a recommendation.
        It wasn’t the Palestinians who rejected the will of the majority regarding this recommendation. It was not the Palestinians which needed a war to acquire a territory for a future state (because they allready had one under mandate). And it wasn’t the Palestinians which expelled people of different religion to become a majority.

        You know that Israel was created only through terrorism and massacres, war and conquest, and mass expulsion and dispossession.

        And regarding the people of Quebec. They are a minority. A minority has only a right to secession if their human rights are fundamentally violated (like the arab Israelis who had to live under military law until 1966.) And if Quebec would have the right then all people residing habitually in Quebec would become citizens of the State of Quebec regardless of their ethnicity or religion. Do you see the difference to Zionism and it’s inherent rascism?

      • Hostage
        September 30, 2011, 5:12 pm

        You can call national aspirations “segregation” until the cows come home. It won’t make it so.

        Well Duh! If you lay down an international frontier inside the occupied Palestinian territory for the purpose of keeping out Palestinians that’s segregation and the crime of apartheid you mental midget.

        What the Flemish in Belgium want, what the people of South Sudan want, what almost 50% of the people in Quebec want, what the Slovaks want, what the Serbians, Croats, Bosnians, Slovenians want is a state of their own, not “segregation”. And that is exactly what Jews want, yet you fault us for it.

        We’ve been here before. The people in Quebec are not proposing to create enclaves for the English speaking minority or to encircle them with 30 foot high concrete walls and checkpoints. Neither are the Flemish in Belgium. Recognition of the new states in the former Yugoslavia was conditioned upon their acceptance of equal rights for ethnic minorities. Likewise, the EU and its enlargement required the countries to implement the minority protections that have been part of the public international law of Europe for generations (i.e. the acquis communautaire). The United Nations imposed identical conditions on recognition for the state of Israel.

        And that is exactly what Jews want, yet you fault us for it.

        No, the Zionists were lying when they said their national home would be secured in accordance with the applicable public law. The Provisional Government of Israel continued to prevaricate when it claimed that it had adopted the constitutional protections for minorities contained in the UN Partition Plan. If you don’t want to be faulted, then accept the norms that are recognized by other civilized peoples. I’m Jewish, but I have no more obligation to support a racist Zionist state in Palestine than a racist Nazi one in the Sudetenland.

      • Citizen
        September 30, 2011, 8:58 pm

        eee, all those peoples you name have lived respectively there for centuries–they were not imported in from foreign lands, from overseas, from other continents.

      • NorthOfFortyNine
        October 1, 2011, 1:21 am

        Hostage,

        I would never want to face you from the wrong end of an argument.

        -N49.

      • eee
        October 1, 2011, 12:22 pm

        Hostage,

        Until the second intifada there were no walls and few checkpoints. If the Vallons start using suicide bombers to blow up Flemish buses, you will see how fast the walls will go up. The wall is not segregation, it is self defense.

      • Hostage
        October 1, 2011, 9:25 pm

        Until the second intifada there were no walls and few checkpoints.

        eee that sucking noise is the vacuum between your ears. By the time of the second intifada, Israel had brutally repressed a couple of generations of Palestinians under a regime of apartheid and colonialism.
        *The 1984 Karp Report : An Israeli Government Inquiry into Settler Violence Against Palestinians on the West Bank established that authorities routinely closed out criminal cases against settlers without bothering to conduct investigations or taking any action.
        *Military Order Nº 5 (1967) concerning closure of the West Bank. Declared the entire West Bank a closed military zone, with exit and entry controlled according to conditions stipulated by the military forces. Curfews were frequently used to confine the inhabitants to their own homes.
        *Under the terms of the Oslo Accords, Israel was required to treat the West Bank and Gaza as a single territory for political, economic, legal and other purposes. Israel started to build a 60-kilometer fence around the Gaza Strip shortly after the implementation of the Accords in 1994. The fence was completed in 1996. Israel pursued a policy of illegally limiting the freedom of movement of the Palestinians living in Gaza through five entry control points and strict policies and practices resembling those of a concentration camp. The fence and entry control measures were all in-place prior to the second intifada and the Israeli withdrawal.
        *Israel had driven the majority of its own Arab population into exile and had refused to permit them to return to their homes or country.
        *Israel imposed martial law on its remaining Palestinian citizens from 1948-1966 and had actively discriminated against them under color of law.
        *Israel had imposed a military occupation regime in the Occupied Territories and revoked the residency rights of over a hundred thousand inhabitants since 1967.
        *The Israeli Supreme Court says there has been a continuous armed conflict between the IDF and the Palestinians since the first intifada.
        *Israel agreed to negotiate an end to the occupation and grant Palestinian autonomy within five years under the first Camp David, and Oslo framework, but maintained an illegal regime of colonialism and apartheid instead. Some of the measures included:
        **Military Order Nº 29 (1967) concerning the operation of prisons. States that prisoners can be denied access to lawyers at any time and at the discretion of the Israeli Military Commander.
        **Military Order Nº 378 (1970). Authorizes Military Commanders to establish military courts with prosecutors, magistrates and presidents appointed by the Commander himself. These courts are authorized to diverge from the rules of trials (with regard to laws of evidence) if deemed necessary.
        **Military Order Nº 58 (1967). Grants Israeli military authorities the control of the land of “absentees” (according to the definition of absentee in the Absentee Property Law of 1950).
        **Military Order Nº 59 (1967). Assigns military authorities with the “Custody of Government Property”, being able to appropriate private lands from individuals or groups by declaring them “Public Lands” or “Lands belonging to the State”.
        **Military Order Nº 291 (1968). Grants Israeli military authorities the control of all disputes concerning land or water.
        **Military Order Nº 1060 (1983). Transfers all pending disputes concerning land from the local Jordanian Courts to the Israeli Military Committee for their judgement.
        **Military Order Nº 321 (1969). Grants Israeli military authorities the right to confiscate Palestinian lands in the name of “Public Service” (which is not defined) and without compensation.

        For more details see Luciana Coconi & David Bondia, Apartheid against the Palestinian people http://www.acsur.org/IMG/pdf/Apartheid_against_the_palestinian_people-2.pdf
        The HSRC/SOAS study Occupation, Colonialism, Apartheid http://electronicintifada.net/downloads/pdf/090608-hsrc.pdf
        The Karp Report http://www.palestine-studies.org/books.aspx?id=337&href=details

  13. Kathleen
    September 30, 2011, 9:36 am

    “An 80% Jewish majority in the combined area of the West Bank and pre-1967 Israel is attainable by 2035 in light of the current demographic trend, bolstered by a unique aliyah potential of 50,000 olim annually. It requires Jerusalem to declare aliyah the top national priority, leveraging the relative strength of the Israeli economy, whose credit rating was recently upgraded by the Standard & Poor agency — the intensified anti-Semitism in the former Soviet Union, Western Europe and Argentina, and expanded Jewish education in the U.S.”

    Racist

Leave a Reply