A Jewish state or an Israeli democracy?

[azurnoir]

A Jewish state or an Israeli democracy? In the talks that appear to be taking place between Israel and the Palestinians, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has asked his negotiating partner to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. One can understand the prime minister: A man so little observant of the Jewish religious tradition is unsure of his Jewish identity, hence his insecurity about the identity of his state - and the need to seek validation from our neighbors.

There's far too little criticism in Israel of this latest whim, which until recently was absent from Israeli diplomacy. For years, Israel struggled to be recognized by the Arab world. But in March 2002, when the Arab League and the Muslim world took up the Saudi initiative to recognize Israel within its 1967 borders, a new threat appeared: peace, which can fragment the Jewish character of the state from within, and rightfully so.

There's a wall-to-wall consensus, from Yisrael Beiteinu to Meretz, from enlightened journalists to learned professors, on Israel's definition as a Jewish state. But this definition strikingly resembles the definition of Iran as an Islamic republic or the United States as a Christian country. True, some American evangelists believe that the United States' Christian character is at risk and seek to cement it in legislation. But the United States, like the rest of the enlightened world, still sees itself as belonging to all its citizens, regardless of religion and creed.

Most Israelis would respond to this by saying Judaism and Jewishness represent not a religion but a people, so Israel must belong not to all its citizens but to the Jews of the world, who, as we know, prefer not to live here.

Strange, I didn't know you could only join a people via religious conversion and not by taking part in its day-to-day culture. But perhaps there's a secular Jewish people-culture I'm not aware of? Maybe Woody Allen, Philip Roth and others are secretly well-versed in the Hebrew language, cinema, literature and theater? For me, the best definition of belonging to a people is the ability to recognize the name of at least one soccer team competing in the local leagues.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/a-jewish-state-or-an-israeli-democracy-1.315725

[aquart]

1. A tiny population easily swamped by the Arab birth rate.

That is the intention, isn't it? To take the only possession of the Jews and make it Arab? On the grounds of equality? It isn't equality. It is total role reversal under discussion.

[Ken Burch]

2. Will you please let go of the insane idea

that support for a unitary state(and I'm not supporting it myself at this point, just so you know)does NOT equate to a wish to drive all Jews away?

It's Europeans that wanted a judenrein land-not Palestinians. Take the aspect of conflict out of this situation, and take the prospect of further dispossession out of it as well, and a lot of the hostility Palestinians feel towards Israelis would go away. Not all, perhaps(there were a lot of wounds inflicted)but I think most of it. The conflict and the prospect of dispossession could be mostly taken out of it now if the Israelis would at LEAST say "this is all the settlements, we won't build any more and we won't expand the existing ones anymore". Neither of these things is really that much to ask.

[azurnoir]

3. there is for me another question why can there not be simply an Israeli nationality?

we here all of the time well in France there is a French nationality, in Denmark there is a ........and on and on however what is left out is that once you are a citizen of any of those countries you are French or Danish or whatever.

[kayecy]

4. Why indeed, but then what happens to the Law of Return?.......

Will it become a "Jewish Law of Return" or a western democracy, ie a state with restricted immigration but blind to race or religion?

Only Israel could live with such contradictions - A state without a western border.....A state with a 'security problem' that has occupied its neighbor for 50 years......A state with only a "Defense Force" that has spent all its existence in fighting outside its borders....etc, etc

[shira]

5. There's no contradiction. In the UK, the head of state must be Anglican by law....

...but that doesn't prevent true democracy, equal rights for all, etc.

Anyone can be head of state in Israel, regardless of religion. This isssue is nothing more than a sanctimonious, hypocritical smokescreen.

[azurnoir]

6. Head of State does that mean the Prime Minister? n/t

[shira]

7. The Queen. n/t

[azurnoir]

8. LOL the queen ?????? she has no political power

it is not nearly the same thing

[shira]

9. LOL....do a little research into what her powers are. n/t

[azurnoir]

10. the Monarchy in the UK became little more than figure heads

long ago the Queens so called powers are strictly ceremonial

eta shira are you just waking or still awake? nothing to this other than curiousity

[shira]

11. Awww, you're excusing the disenfranchisement of millions in the UK. Tsk, tsk.

http://www.blurtit.com/q540921.html

Domestic Affairs

The appointment and dismissal of ministers;

The summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Parliament;

Royal assent to bills;

The appointment and regulation of the civil service;

The commissioning of officers in the armed forces;

Directing the disposition of the armed forces in the UK;

Appointment of Queen's Counsel;

Issue and withdrawal of passports;

Prerogative of mercy. (Used to apply in capital punishment cases. Still used, eg to remedy errors in sentence calculation)

Granting honours;

Creation of corporations by Charter;

Foreign Affairs

The making of treaties;

Declaration of war;

Deployment of armed forces overseas;

Recognition of foreign states;

Accreditation and reception of diplomats.

[azurnoir]

12. well actually she can but she'd be best to not if she wants to remain Queen

The Queen is actually one of the most powerful rulers in the world. She alone can pass laws, declare war, sign international treaties, dissolve parliament etc. Even compulsory purchase orders are a modern evolution of the powers that allowed the monarch to confiscate the land of troublesome nobles.

However, all these powers are today are used under the advise of ministers. As such, the Prime Minister uses theses powers in the name of the people (in theory). The Queen could turn round tomorrow and sack the Government and put one of her friends in place before declaring war on France. She does not do so because it would create a constitional crisis that would probably lead to a republic.

The exception to this rule is if the Governemt of the day is so rotten in some way that she acts in the name of the people and calls an election. It would have to be pretty extreme circumstances to warrant such a reaction obviously, and not very likely to happen any time soon, but its a vital safeguard against tyranny.

It was only in the 60s that the Queen, undoubtedly to her relief, was no longer responsible for personally selecting the leader of the Tory party (and therefore potentially PM).

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_is_higher_rank_the_queen_or_king_in_england_who_runs_england

[shira]

15. So is UK law discriminatory and anti-democratic WRT only Anglicans having this power?

No one is being disenfranchised, all are eligible to participate in this democratic process....?

:shrug:

Because if this is "kosher" by your standards, I'm sure you wouldn't mind Israel passing a law requiring that only Jews can be head of state.

[azurnoir]

18. the UK is discriminatory in the manner that all inherited titles are

however if Israel wishes to become a monarchy with Jews as the inheritors fine as long as it operates under the same constraints as the Queen of England does or if she uses it she loses it but in this case what is done internally is one thing but what the rest of the world thinks and recognizes is another or did Bush go to the Queen when he wanted a war with Iraq or did he go to PM

[shira]

20. Come on now, call UK law for what it really is....racist, apartheid. You can do it.

If Israel is undemocratic, then that must be the case within the UK too....

Come on now, show all that righteous indignation against the mean old UK. I'll wait.

And while you're at it, the moderate PA - which denies basic human rights to Palestinians - has a law on the books calling for the death penalty to those who sell land to Jews. But maybe that's not as bad as Israel, which unlike the UK, allows its head of state to be of any religion....

:eyes:

Just more sanctimonious BS.

[azurnoir]

23. already answered in 18 n/t

[azurnoir]

13. the smokescreen is the one you are trying to create by bringing the Queen of England into this

regardless of her powers

[shira]

16. No, it's to expose the dishonest, hypocritical methods used by tools of far Rightwing regimes. n/t

Double standards, hypocrisy....

Toys of the rightwing intended to stupify the ignorant masses.

[azurnoir]

17. yes the argument your are presenting is precisely that

"Toys of the rightwing intended to stupify the ignorant masses."

[shira]

19. Okay, so if you don't mind the UK head of state being Anglican, you should have no problem...

...with Israel's head of state being Jewish by law.

:eyes:

[azurnoir]

22. answered in 18 n/t

[shaayecanaan]

27. Incorrect

The Act of Settlement requires only that the monarch not be Catholic. This is likely to be repealed in the medium term and it is quite possible that a future monarch may be crowned by some other religious authority.

Are you arguing that Britain is an Anglican state?

[Jim Sagle]

14. They already have both, thank you very much.

:beer:

[shira]

21. This entire article is based on the falsehood that there is no Jewish nation. n/t

[whosinpower]

24. No it doesn't

snip from article - There's a wall-to-wall consensus, from Yisrael Beiteinu to Meretz, from enlightened journalists to learned professors, on Israel's definition as a Jewish state. But this definition strikingly resembles the definition of Iran as an Islamic republic or the United States as a Christian country. True, some American evangelists believe that the United States' Christian character is at risk and seek to cement it in legislation. But the United States, like the rest of the enlightened world, still sees itself as belonging to all its citizens, regardless of religion and creed.

Most Israelis would respond to this by saying Judaism and Jewishness represent not a religion but a people, so Israel must belong not to all its citizens but to the Jews of the world, who, as we know, prefer not to live here.


It asks a fundamental question - Does Israel belong to all its citizens, or does it belong to the Jews of the world? This question arose out of the demands of Netanyahu towards Abbas.

[shira]

25. Jews have been regarded as a nation since biblical times. They meet the requirements of a 'nation'

In fact, Jews have self-identified themselves a nation. It takes a hell of a lot of nerve to tell Jews how to define themselves.

Shakti provided the dictionary definition...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x333086#333558

Every traditional Jew, whether in Israel or not, has been repeatedly stating for many centuries "Next year in Jerusalem". What kind of non-nation does that? :shrug:

[shaayecanaan]

26. Well, they don't speak the same language...

since most diaspora Jews don't speak Hebrew. Most of them do not attend religious services regularly. And most Jews do not dress, eat or act in ways that are distinct from other Westerners.

Judaism is a religion. It does not make sense to regard it as anything else. The fact that there are secular Jews does not make it any less a religion than the fact that there are lapsed Catholics or non-practising Protestants make either Catholicism or Protestantism less of a religion.

[azurnoir]

28. the kind of religion that ritualistically repeats the Haggadah

every Pesach, for someone who so claims to be about the "the Jewish State" one would have to wonder

[whosinpower]

29. Your not even on the same page

The article does not question how Jews define themselves. That has nothing to do with it.

THE QUESTION IS - Is Israel a state for All its citizens, or is Israel a state for the Jews of the world?