:"The inflammatory question he asks at the end is all the more pertinent
when considering the creation of Israel relied on the ethnic cleansing –
an act of
genocide – of much of the indigenous population of Palestine
="
Genocide becomes mainstream in Israeli discourse
http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/21054
==========================================================================
NOTE ON ESSAY by SF Ethnic cleansing is NOT genocide. THe latter is the ultimate crime that can be committed. It is important to maintain the distinction THe policy of Zionists for Israel/Palestine has always been ethnic cleansing. Then(before WW2) called "involuntary transfer." THe literature is copious now.I could give you referennces Transfer did not have the stigma then it has today in most of the world. It was a logical implicaton of Zionism and anti-Semitism. For that reason many Zionistsx
were sympathetic to anbti-Semnmitic transfer policies--they felt Jews were alien element in Europe and it was nsatural that European wanted to evict them. Similarly Zikonism in its initial stasges felt Palestinians did not belong in Palestine, Jews' land. They kept it secret becaujse they knew Palestinians would rebel.Not becauuse
it was morally unacceptable.
However most of the original Zionists liuke Ben-Gurion were not particularly racist. They had internalkized Enlightenment values (Of whicj Jews were beneficiaries)--and thedy were revolted by the viler forms of anti-SEmitism and European racism. So azt least consciously they did not regard themselves as superior to ARabs. THey tended to have WEstern European prejudices
that they were smasrter and more advanced race--but Zionism originally did not consciously posit racial hierachy.
Ben-Gurion sujpported transfer--not genocide. He did not think Jews had the right to destroy Palestinians as a eople--in whole or in part. THe goal of the 47-8 massacxres was to get ARabs to flee Palestine. They did not admit it of course because that was not the terms of UN partition. Today we look down on edthnic cleansing---but it is the inexorable logic
of the idea of "Jewish state"."
Genocide was the logical implication of Nazism because it did posit racial hierarchy Jewsx wetre considedred vermin. Israel is the only advanced infdustrial country that is ruled by leaders who believe in the master race.
If thy do not believe thst, they cetrtainly regsard ARabs with absoluterly the same contempt as the Nazis regarded the Jews--. a race that no longer DESERVED to live. THe state of Israel no longer deserves to exist. Any state whose leaders advocate racial genocide is a danger to all humanity. SF
Ultimately, if the mentality and narrative of the elite and
influential leaders are foundational in such an antagonistic way, backed
by discriminatory laws and policies towards non-Jews that reflect these
positions, it is no wonder that much of the Israeli Jewish population
has become exceedingly vicious over time.
As above, so below
When the latest war on Gaza erupted,
95 percent of Israeli Jews,
surveyed by the Israel Democracy Institute and Tel Aviv University on
three separate occasions between July 14-23, believed that the war was
justified, and only 3 to 4 percent agreed with a statement that the
Israeli army had used excessive firepower in the conflict. Compare this
latest survey to the one conducted in
February 2009,
after a month-long war on Gaza, in which 45 percent of the Israel
public were open to negotiations with Hamas, and 15 percent thought the
war should have been ended sooner.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lynne Lopez-Salzedo <
lynne...@gmail.com>
To: Seth Farber <
seth...@aol.com>
Sent: Sat, Aug 9, 2014 6:03 pm
Subject: Genocide becomes mainstream in Israeli discourse