"God's Chosen People" (Questions about Compassion & Forgiveness)

[KoKo]

God’s chosen people
Jostein Gaarder, Aftenposten 05.08.06

From the Norwegian by Sirocco
-snip-

Compassion and forgiveness

We do not recognize the old Kingdom of David as a model for the 21st century map of the Middle East. The Jewish rabbi claimed two thousand years ago that the Kingdom of God is not a martial restoration of the Kingdom of David, but that the Kingdom of God is within us and among us. The Kingdom of God is compassion and forgiveness.

Two thousand years have passed since the Jewish rabbi disarmed and humanized the old rhetoric of war. Even in his time, the first Zionist terrorists were operating.

Israel does not listen

For two thousand years, we have rehearsed the syllabus of humanism, but Israel does not listen. It was not the Pharisee that helped the man who lay by the wayside, having fallen prey to robbers. It was a Samaritan; today we would say, a Palestinian. For we are human first of all — then Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. Or as the Jewish rabbi said: “And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others?” We do not accept the abduction of soldiers. But nor do we accept the deportation of whole populations or the abduction of legally elected parliamentarians and government ministers.

We recognize the state of Israel of 1948, but not the one of 1967. It is the state of Israel that fails to recognize, respect, or defer to the internationally lawful Israeli state of 1948. Israel wants more; more water and more villages. To obtain this, there are those who want, with God’s assistance, a final solution to the Palestinian problem. The Palestinians have so many other countries, certain Israeli politicians have argued; we have only one.

The USA or the world?

Or as the highest protector of the state of Israel puts it: “May God continue to bless America.” A little child took note of that. She turned to her mother, saying: “Why does the President always end his speeches with ‘God bless America’? Why not, ‘God bless the world’?”

Then there was a Norwegian poet who let out this childlike sigh of the heart: “Why doth Humanity so slowly progress?” It was he that wrote so beautifully of the Jew and the Jewess. But he rejected the notion of God’s chosen people. He personally liked to call himself a Muhammedan.

More........
http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/08/05/israel-a-dire-prophecy/


BACKGROUND OF WRITER:

Jostein Gaarder is the most succsessful Danish author of today. Maybe you know Sophie's World. Gaarder has been attacked for a very critical essay on Israel's war politics, that has been published on August 5 in the Danish newspapers Aftenposten.

What do you think of his viewpoints and rhetorics?

http://www.boomantribune.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/8/5/122335/1324

Please read also the author's justification:

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1415414.ece

(Original article was published in Danish language: http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/article1411153.ece )

[bobbolink]

1. "God Bless The Whole World. NO EXCEPTIONS"

My favorite bumpersticker of all time. I appreciate that small child, and would that we all have the same heart!

A great find-- I hope it stays here, as this is important reading.

Thanks! :thumbsup:

[brentspeak]

2. Self-flagellating, white liberal Euro-guilt

He reminds me of a Swedish student I knew from college, who wore his hair in dreadlocks and walked around campus wearing Malcolm X and "Free Mumia" t-shirts. Good grief.

[tocqueville]

6. naive maybe

but at least those guys ask questions that most Americans inside the bubble don't. Then one day the same people ask themselves "why do they hate us ?"

[WiseButAngrySara]

11. Oh PLEASE! Self-flagellating GUILT? Isn't this precisely what you

defenders of Israel want? Either we "self-flagellate" with "guilt" or we are anti-Semitic! I loved the analogy "The Final Solution" didn't you? If the shoe fits, Israel, wear it.

[brentspeak]

12. You misunderstand. I'm not really commenting on the issue of Israel

Just how some people appoint themselves as The Friend Of The World's "Oppressed" Peoples. I find them as self-righteous as "holier-than-thou" fundamentalists.

[WiseButAngrySara]

14. O.K. I get your drift, and can somewhat understand your point of view,

but I don't think the author at all fits or warrants your description! My opinion of the author (based more on his book Sophie's World than this small snippet of a translated opinion) is not that of self-righteousness. He is very learned and scholarly, but down-to-earth enough to write a 'novel' about philosophy from the pre-Socratic period all the way up to current 20th C. philosophy, and made erudite subject matter interesting to children as well as adults! I studied philosophy with a passion in college years ago (especially political philosophy) and still am to some extent, but IIRC, he mentioned philosophers that I hadn't even read about. My opinion of him has only improved, given his moral standing on Israel's current actions. I don't perceive him though to be "A Friend of the World's Oppresed" ...though quite frankly, I can find nothing wrong with that view.

Sorry if I misunderstood. DU has actually turned me more against Israel than I perhaps otherwise would have been, because of the vitriolic accusations of the much abused phrase anti-Semitism. The word has very significant historical meaning and to throw it around like an ugly epithet makes me even angrier at Israel. Not rational, but nor is the abuse of any word.

[OrechDin]

46. The only time we Hear the `Anti semitism` schtick is from you..you seem =

OBSESSED with it...

[Violet_Crumble]

61. ` We` being people who don't read many posts at DU?

Because there certainly is a segment of the DU population that indulges in what `we` claim doesn't happen....

[OrechDin]

65. Point me out some of them? nt

[Violet_Crumble]

68. You want links to deleted posts?

Because most of them have been deleted. I can assure you that it does happen, though, and a few folk who indulge in it have aimed it at me up in GD....

[OrechDin]

69. Guess I aint been around long enough nt

[tocqueville]

3. link doesn't work

besides the recognition of a state cannot be passed on religious fantasies. The Israel of 1948 was at least the product of an international treaty (even if discussable). The problem is that if you advocate to go back to those borders, which are the only legal ones (the other have been acquired by force) you'll probably be accused to be either a Nazi or belonging to the Hezbollah.



And Jostein Gaarder is not Danish but Norwegian and is Norway's most successfull international writer after Ibsen

[IntiRaymi]

4. I would posit that no states are based on religious fantasies.

Nations exist within the geopolitical 'space.'
Religion is, has been, and will likely always be a motivating influence for the people.

[tocqueville]

5. I agree, it's a motivation

but it's the "official" motivation. Israel exists because the West found it useful in an historical context. After peak oil, they won't give a fuck except for the problem of taking in 6 million refugees. The worse in that story is that Israel might have been viable if it hasn't been that greedy for land. I think that their latest adventure in Lebanon sealed their fate. They have lost all credibility. Either they really negotiate a just peace or they are fucked in the long run. Because the day any Muslim "Arab" nation acquires nuclear weapons (which is a matter of time), they are going to be "thrown into the sea" by conventional means. And that of course would be a tragedy.

[IntiRaymi]

9. Very accurate thought.

Israel is a british - american ploy. All apologies to those of you who feel that the Jewish people deserve a homeland, to be safe from the very real prejudices of non-jews. What happened in Europe, at the hands of the germans, is something that all of us must consider when understanding the israeli psyche. But the cynicism of politicians is limitless, and anything is a valid tool for manipulation.
The more I see things this way, the more I see an advantage to being cosmopolitan: To not allow oneself to fall into a trap where you have no choice but to fight.
Israel is in that situation right now: It has no choice but to be a nation perpetually at war.

[OrechDin]

48. That border on the map you got there actually IS a non starter nt

[KoKo]

7. Booman's site is down....got too many angry visitors....n/t

[KoKo]

8. An incredible Post from someone "raised fundie" on Joseph Campbell Site!

Check this out! It's an incredible read. I haven't fact checked all the statements but it's just a good read for those who like "searching/research" like I do:

Go to this link and post down to #4 Reply...

http://www.jcf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?topic=2275&forum=27&7
============

Bodhi_Bliss
Moderator

Joined: Oct 07, 2003
Posts: 562 Posted: 2006-08-10 13:09 Wow, Martin

... this could be as big a tinder keg as the Drums of War thread (which is about due for a resurrection).

I don't know quite know exactly what my reaction is - we're all finding that out right now as I think my way through it out loud ... but I often find myself unconsciously nodding my head (well, it's unconscious until I notice it), in resonance with the underlying sentiment.

At first glance I didn't notice the intro pointing out Gaarder was writing in the style of Amos, an eight-century B.C. prophet and the eponymous author of a book in the Hebrew scriptures

(I had to fight the impulse to write "Old Testament" there - the automatic, mostly unnoticed Christian bias built into my patterns of speech and thought).

Understanding the form alters my perception of the piece. My initial reaction was positive in terms of several specific points and certain poetic imagery - but at the same time I was put off by the imperious "we" and the overall tone

... so though my immediate reaction to the opening paragraphs was positive (the concept of "God's Chosen People" provides no moral justification for a war or an occupation in the contemporary world), I noticed myself getting restless towards the end, uncomfortable with some of the rhetoric which I feared would shut down consideration of the very valid main points of the piece among American readers.

On a second read I approached Gaarder's essay more as literature than as commentary, and found myself warming to his thoughts.

Gaarder ably expresses a powerful sentiment - but his appeal to morality still misses ... which I suspect might be a fault of translation.

Political columns, full of facts and figures and opinions, are perhaps easier to quickly translate - but literature - and that's what this essay is, replete with poetic imagery and literary devices - takes time to translate. It's far easier to translate words literally than to convey the rhythm and nuances of a metaphorical image. One must wallow in the author's thought, recognize his patterns, understand the references and find suitable imagery for conveying the same metaphorical possibilities in a foreign tongue

... and it just doesn't seem the translator had the time or luxury to "wallow" ...

I don't find often find myself hankering to read Danish, yet I sense there is something missing in the English version, a hint of greater depth - but only a hint.

There is still some restlessness on my part, some unease as I work my way through it - which might not be the author's fault, but simply me wrestling with my own projections, my own cultural biases ... rational as I try to be, I note a tickle in the back of my brain, a pinprick of guilt at breaking a deeply embedded taboo

... facts be damned, it just doesn't feel right to criticize Israel …

If that's my reaction - and I'm very open to the sentiments Gaarder expresses and the facts behind them - I imagine the typical reaction among Americans would be even more negative.

I am intrigued at how deeply imprinted on the American psyche is our cultural bias in favor of Israel.

Or maybe it's just me. I grew up in a Christian cult that interpreted the Bible (well, the parts they wanted, anyway) literally - which included elevating Israel onto a pedastal of mythic proportions. We eschewed the pagan celebrations of Christmas and Easter, observing instead the same Hebrew festivals and Holy Days as Jesus - and a central tenet of the cult was a belief that the people of Great Britain and the United States are the descendents of Ephraim and Manasseh, two of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, with other countries in Europe representing the other tribes - France from Reuben, Switzerland from Gad, Denmark the tribe of Dan, etc.

(sorry Martin - Germans were considered the true latter-day descendents of the Assyrians, the biblical bad guys who carried off the lost ten tribes – and boy, does God ever have it in for you, you Sennacharib-lovers!).

Hence I grew up thinking the Jews were my physical as well as spiritual kinsmen.

I also read Leon Uris's QBVII, Mila 18, Exodus, and The Source in junior high and high school, along with Max Dimont's Jews, God, and History - so i was fairly familiar with the history of the Holy Land, the Diaspora, the Holocaust, and the establishment of Israel in 1948 - and I cheered Israel when they kicked butt in 1967 and again in 1973.

Far from anti-semitic, I was probably more "pro-semitic" than the average American.

A shift in my consciousness was prompted by Anwar Sadat's courage and compassion, as I realized not all Arabs were bad guys. Eventually I even dared to think that not all Israelis were automatically good guys. But though I've transcended my upbringing, nevertheless the picture of the universe formed in childhood still provides an unconscious context within which I evaluate what's going on in Israel/Palestine today. My initial gut reaction is almost always behind the Israelis - and then I check myself, step back and examine the facts of the situation, and with luck arrive at a more balanced view

(but one that doesn't automatically assume the Israelis are the bad guys, either).

Many of Gaarder's points ring true for me - for example, comparisons of Israeli policy and practice to South Africa's apartheid and Saddam Hussein's Iraq

(e.g., Iraq violated 16 U.N. resolutions and had no weapons of mass destruction after 1991; Israel has violated 70 U.N. resolutions and does have weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons they won't officially admit).

Even more compelling for me is his agreement with a point Joseph Campbell often made. Campbell notes that Israel owes its existence to the power of a mythological idea - which it does. (This is a point Campbell makes about mythology, not about Israel - he's not suggesting Israel should be disbanded or doesn't have the right to exist.)

After World War II there was much debate about what to do with the DPs - "displaced persons," or refugees - who survived the concentration camps. There was even discussion of creating a homeland for them from part of South Africa - but momentum had been building for a Jewish homeland in Palestine since the end of the nineteenth century (and encouraged by the British government's Balfour Declaration of 1917) as growing numbers of Jews emigrated there.

Political considerations aside though, the Western psyche eagerly embraced the idea of a nation of Israel almost two thousand years after that nation had ceased to exist and her people mostly melted away. This idea clearly resonates with the biblical mythology that informed and shaped our civilization and still holds sway today.

Flip the channel to most religious broadcasters in the United States and there's not only unqualified unreflective knee-jerk support for everything Israel does, but also a near universal presumption that “the end times” or “latter days” prophesied in the Bible began with the establishment of Israel in 1948 (a conclusion based on the parable of the fig tree in Mark 13:28 – “Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves (out of season), ye know that summer (harvest time) is near” – which assumes the fig tree is a metaphor for Israel).

True, not every Christian in America so believes – maybe not even most – but certainly the noisiest. I think of Pastor John Hagee, who has the ear of the president, and publicly proclaims that we may be weeks away from the rapture as World War III breaks out in the Middle East – a war that destroys unthinkable numbers and ends at Armageddon in a confrontation between Israel and the United States against much of the rest of the world.

This thinking makes me nervous – especially when I hear secular neocons (like William Kristol) - the other group that has the ear of the president – claiming on FOX news that the Lebanon crisis is the opening salvo of World War III ... followed by the president wanting to give Israel enough time to redraw the map of the Middle East (“birth pangs,” as Condi Rice calls it).

But that’s wandering far afield from a focus on Israel’s actions.

The attack on Lebanon does seem an overreaction (it’s Lebanon’s infrastructure, not Hezbollah’s they’re destroying) as the death of innocent Lebanese civilians from Israeli bombs (far in excess of the handful of Hezbollah casualties) blunts outrage over the far fewer number of Israeli civilians killed by Hezbollah rockets. These and other facts do make me wonder about the morality of Israel’s actions, and Gaarder does a wonderful job of addressing those concerns:

If Israel is to be treated as the Chosen People, then her actions should be held to the same high standard to which God held the Chosen People in the book of Amos.

(Of course, that’s hardly a consistent standard throughout the Hebrew testament. God often commands His People to commit dastardly atrocities – particularly the slaughter of Canaanites, right down to male infants, and the taking of “fields which you did not plant, cities which you did not build” – though genocide certainly resolved the Palestinian refugee problem of the day ...

so I’m reticent about basing policy on God's concept of morality).

Gaarder’s suggestion of responding to Israel’s behavior with tactics similar to the boycott and pressure applied to South Africa that hastened the end of apartheid is certainly creative – though to be effective it requires collective action on the parts of nations, institutions, and individuals, which was slow to build against South Africa, and I suspect would be harder to sustain against Israel today

... especially in the United States, where any criticism of Israel, legitimate or not, is met with charges of anti-semitism.

The only direct comment I can find by Joseph Campbell on Arab-Israeli tensions is in response to a question posed by an interviewer wondering what the U.S. stance should be. Campbell suggested an even-handed approach – taking into consideration equally the concerns of all parties to the conflict.

It’s interesting that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has earmarked the term “even-handed” as revealing anti-semitic tendencies – so Campbell’s call for fairness to all in negotiations exposes his anti-semitism (which strikes me as an odd designation, given that the Palestinians are also Semites ...). When criticizing Israeli policies – even very bad policies that we criticize in other nations – whether right or wrong, you’re expressing anti-semitism ... and then the argument becomes no longer about a specific policy, but about racial and religious bias (shades of the Holocaust).

Of course, I don’t believe what some call the Jewish lobby has “orchestrated” America’s support of Israel. Fears of appearing anti-semitic does help keep the American left aligned behind Israel, while fundamentalist dogma and faith in the approaching apocalypse (which heralds the Second Coming) does the same for the American right ... but these motivations aren’t external (though outside factors certainly help reinforce them).

These come from within – which brings us back to that unconscious cultural bias.

A cursory reading of Gaarder’s essay seems to deny the existence of Israel, call for her destruction and the scattering of her people. A closer reading reveals that Gaarder supports Israel, but the Israel of 1948, not what she had become today. That, though, is obscure in the essay, and will doubtless be overlooked by those already inclined to disagree with Gaarder.

What do I think of the essay?

It strikes a chord – but could be better written. I suspect it will turn off more people than it enlightens – at least it will on this side of the Atlantic

- but it does open a discussion we must have, and ask questions we must face someday, if not today.

Nevertheless, I can’t shake that vague perception in the back of my head of doing something very wrong by even considering questioning Israel’s actions - sorta' like buying Mel Gibson a beer ...

Oh well.

"Next year in Jerusalem,"
bodhibliss

[tocqueville]

30. what Gaarder means is that Israel has spent up its original "goodwill"

but that's not very new in European thinking specially in the Scandinavian one. I understand enough Norwegian to
translate the following :

"Vi anerkjenner staten Israel av 1948, men ikke den av 1967. Det er staten Israel som ikke anerkjenner, respekterer og bøyer seg for den folkerettslige staten Israel av 1948."

that is to say :

We recognize the state of Israel of 1948, but not the one of 1967. It's the state of Israel that doesn't recognize, respects and abides to the internationally legal state of Israel of 1948.

Scandinavians have a special relation to the Jewish question since WWII. The Danes resisted openly to the Nazis and the King defied them openly by wearing the infamous Jewish star. The Norwegians had so few jews that they were not really involved besides the heroic anti-nazi resistance and the Swedes... collaborated. They didn't took Jews as refugees and the Swedish establishment was openly anti-semitic. This was partially "washed away" by the actions of Folke Bernadotte and specially by Raoul Wallenverg, both attempting to save people and paying that with their lives.

Count Folke Bernadotte of Wisborg (2 January 1895 - 17 September 1948) or simply Count Bernadotte, was a Swedish diplomat noted for his negotiation of the release of 15,000 mostly Scandinavian prisoners from the German concentration camps in World War II and for his assassination by members of a Jewish paramilitary organization (Lehi) during his service as United Nations mediator in Palestine. One of the culprits of the assassination was Yitzhak Shamir, to become Israeli PM.

The Lehi took public credit for the murders in the name of a previously unknown group, but Lehi's role was never in doubt. Lehi was forcibly disarmed and many members were arrested, but nobody was ever charged with the murders. Yellin-Mor and another Lehi member Schmuelevich were charged with belonging to a terrorist organization. They were found guilty but immediately released and pardoned (Yellin-Mor had meanwhile been elected to the first Knesset). Years later, Cohen's role was uncovered by David Ben-Gurion's biographer Michael Bar Zohar while Cohen was working for Ben-Gurion as a security guard. The first public admission of Lehi's role in the murder was made in 1977 (Yediot Aharonot, Feb 28).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte

All this widely known in the Scandinavian countries, Norway, Sweden and Denmark have basically the same language.

My perception is that the primary "Exodus" story, the wars against "nasty Arabs" (already perceived as a threat in the 60ies), the outrage of Munich... were put in relation to Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. The Scandinavians and other Europeans were aware of Israels terroristic roots (see the Bernadotte story above) and started to relativize the support to Israel in the late seventies and specially in the eighties. For most Europeans it was obvious that the Palestinians had a point, even if they disapproved of the methods. Accurate reporting from the occupied territories, the war against Lebanon (the previous one) showed that the Israeli weren't the good guys they were supposed to be and specially that they never wanted to negotiate. And the fact of being automatically called anti-semite because you don't like Sharon has pissed more than one, specially those who risked their lives to save Jews during WWII. My father was one of them.

Besides secular Europeans have never really bought the "Holy Land" story. The right to exist was based on a "de facto" situation, not on the Bible. Today's young Europeans don't even know what stands in the Bible because nobody reads it and it's not taught. They think that Jesus was a cool guy and that Moses had a beard because they seen some neat musicals about the ten commandments. That's about all. Gaarder uses the Bible in its rethorics because his public is more one of intellectuals.

The latest war has outraged Europe. Attacks on refugee convoys reminds of the Stukas diving in France and Belgium.
People gather money, food and medecine for Lebanon, not Israel, except of course the Jewish communities.

So what Gaarder expresses is more or less a concentrate of the opinions of many. Israel had a chance and blew it. When you have been a victim of the Holocaust, you are expected to become a moral hero. Not a copy of your executioners.

[WiseButAngrySara]

10. This is beautiful! I love Sophie's World, and I've just pulled it out

again to re-read. I will definitely check out your links. I absolutely agree with what he has written on this subject and I commend him for it. I'm surprised your post has not vanished!

[jonnyblitz]

13. the PSU police haven't arrived yet to do a mass "alert".

that could be why the thread is still here or not locked.

[KoKo]

15. A discussion is important on this...not all of our minds are made up on

the GREAT MORAL ISSUES OF OUR TIMES on THIS. It might be that arguments could sway many of us ...but isn't it HIGH TIME FOR DISCUSSION?

I know here in the "I/P" Forum folks feel they have "Discussed this to Death" but for many of us NEW to this Moral Questioning...this NEEDS MORE?

Please...DISCUSS...It's the ONLY REASON I posted! FOR DISCUSSION! but gettin it "LOCKED" does no good for any of us who are QUESTIONING what has gone on for YEARS/CENTURIES even...and we want to know WHY? WHY? WHY? when we see only CARNAGE AND DESTRUCTION!

:shrug:

[WiseButAngrySara]

17. I so agree! See the end of post #14, and just posted #16. I've almost

left DU over this issue. The 'Anti-Semitism' epithet carelessly thrown at people with good moral intent and a desire to truly understand BOTH sides of the issue is not at all helpful, nor enlightening. It actually has made me MORE anti-Israel, not less. Because of this war, I have not taken for granted the history of Israel like I used to, and what I've found out has not all been positive to my view of Israel. But to outright stifle all dissent on discussions of fact about what is occurring is using the very same tactics as the Nazis. I find it abhorrent!

[IntiRaymi]

34. Their tactics are truly disgusting

On more than one ocassion they have taken statements of mine entirely out of context. They have accused me of wanting more israeli civilians killed and of being in favor having more synagogues attacked.
It's one thing to debate something with people who will bend to logic and evidence - as I will. But it is an entirely different thing when it becomes a shouting match, with the verbiage directed at the moderators, and not at you.
They don't think fairness is admissible as a tool when dealing with us. We are the enemy, apparently.
I wonder why the moderators are falling for these things.

[OrechDin]

52. re:`The 'Anti-Semitism' epithet `

I only hear you repeating it ad nauseum, no one else just you....

:think:

[IntiRaymi]

71. Oh it can be seen here and there.

Alas for me, I don't keep records, and I cannot search without donating.
Who are you, and where are you from?
And why are you stalking me?

[jonnyblitz]

20. oh i was on this site earlier today,. I read it all.

I agree it should be discussed. the pro-israel cheerleaders will be the ones who try to get it locked. It is hard to have any type of critical discussion on this topic here. That's how it is. :shrug:

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jonnyblitz]

19. somebody sent me a link a few weeks ago because

they have a whole thread dedicated to me in the "anti-semitism on the internet" forum. :P

The link was being passed around via PM...

[WiseButAngrySara]

21. I'll look for it! I've actually bookmarked their site, because at least

there I can just read their views and not fear being labeled anti-Semitic if I question or disagree. Or more infuriatingly, having posts deleted without knowing WTF for!

[KoKo]

22. Do you really believe that the post and links constitute

"Anti-Semitism?" Are you "honestly saying this?" :shrug:

[WiseButAngrySara]

29. He was responding to my post which I just re-posting in a spirit of utter

anger and defiance! post #27. He knew about the group that I'm speaking about...he referred to them as 'police', and apparently he was one of their topics for conversation and labeled as 'anti-Semite.'

[jonnyblitz]

81. I don't know what in hell you are talking about. you seem

confused. I am saying THE PRO ISRAEL CROWD will say this, NOT ME!!!

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

39. I don't usually say this, but...

I hit alert on yr post, so get angry at me rather than at the mods. I don't see why there's a need to run around DU posting links to a site that is openly hostile to DU and in doing so increase the traffic to the site and give the person who runs that site a chubby by giving him and his buddies the attention they crave...

btw, yr way out of line accusing the mods in this forum of having a bias one way or the other...

[WiseButAngrySara]

45. The people at the site are DUers! And btw, I think i saw your name

posted there. so chill. and why don't you quit pestering the mods if you're so concerned about it?

[Violet_Crumble]

47. And?

I know there's DUers there, and I know my name has featured pretty prominently. So what?

btw, I'm not the one getting all angry and posting links to that cesspit all over DU, so I don't think it's me who needs to chill :)

[WiseButAngrySara]

57. Are you sane? Cesspit? Posted all over DU? What are you talking

about? If you're posting there why would you call it a Cesspit? Really, I'm confused. Aren't you part of the so-called PSU police? (terminology by another DUer)

[Violet_Crumble]

59. Yeah, I think you might be confused...

Uh, I'm not posting there. I don't think I'd be very welcome there, somehow :) My name's been mentioned there coz some long-banned DUers have the big hates for me. Bottom line is that I think the site is pathetic in a sadly humourous way, but on the other hand I think posting links to it at DU is just increasing its traffic and giving some really nasty folk the attention they crave. I hope that's made it a bit clearer :)

On edit: Those two smileys in my post are nearly perfectly aligned! I'm giving myself a slap on the back for achieving that!

[WiseButAngrySara]

64. Oh! I'm sorry and I was confused. I'll PM you tomorrow...I'm so tired

and confused right now I wouldn't make much sense! You must think I'm a rude beeetch (I'm really not! ...but I sort of thought you were!) I can't repeat your perfectly symmetrical smileys but I'll try. Thanks for clearing up some of the confusion, but I'm still quite befuddled!

:hi:
:hi:

Perfect alignment!!!!

[Violet_Crumble]

67. That's cool. I probably wasn't very clear...

..and my apologies for that. And I don't think yr rude, btw....


Peace...

Violet...

[OrechDin]

50. I agree nt

[Violet_Crumble]

58. You agree with what? n/t

[OrechDin]

60. You alerting that post nt

[Violet_Crumble]

62. Probably for different reasons than I did, no doubt. n/t

[OrechDin]

63. You surmise that from my hebrew name?

OrechDin Means Lawyer...in `the chosen peoples` language lol

Can`t i just agree with the Australians for once...

I never joined that site yet btw...

[Violet_Crumble]

66. No, from yr `posts`....

Okay, I'll let you agree with the Australians just this once ;)

Hebrew is a language that I would like to learn, but just as with Arabic, the different script makes it really difficult. I got as far as aleph and bet and gave up...

[OrechDin]

70. Its not an easy language,but Arabic persons seem to grasp it

better than native English. After a lifetime of learning I am not fluent yet.

[Meshuga]

18. Author justification?

Look at what the author says:

"We do not believe in the notion of God’s chosen people. We laugh at this people’s fancies and weep over its misdeeds. To act as God’s chosen people is not only stupid and arrogant, but a crime against humanity. We call it racism."

I take Mel Gibson's drunken incident much lighter than the ignorant quote above.

[KoKo]

23. I posted MANY LINKS in my OP...if you can't link the sites it might be

that they are down because of ATTACKS! :shrug:

[Meshuga]

24. There is no justification for that quote

It's ridiculous!

[KoKo]

25. huh?

[Meshuga]

28. The quote in post# 18 n/t

[KoKo]

40. The link I gave in my "OP" works for me...and gives the whole post

by the Danish Author who wrote this. The whole background is in the links in the OP...but if it didn't work for you for the author here's the original post that I could only give "snip" of. :shrug:

http://sirocco.blogsome.com/2006/08/05/israel-a-dire-prophecy

[WiseButAngrySara]

26. Reading post #8 above helps put it in some sort of context, but

nonetheless, I find no objection to the remark that to believe that you are 'uniquely' God's ONLY Chosen People is *stupid, arrogant and racist. IMHO it is as *stupid, arrogant and racist as Christians believing that Christ's Words (though true) are the ONLY truth as spoken ONLY by Christ, and that this quote "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14: 6) means that those not hearing or reading Christ's specific words will not "go to heaven."

(*The word stupid I would not use; ignorance is better.)

From post #8 (a long but excellent read of some of the angst we all seem to feel when critical of Israel, even when their actions justify it...I thought the author of the post in #8 was too knee-jerk pro-Israel, but it is an eloquent read)

"At first glance I didn't notice the intro pointing out Gaarder was writing in the style of Amos, an eight-century B.C. prophet and the eponymous author of a book in the Hebrew scriptures"

[Meshuga]

32. Chosen People

The belief that Jews are the Chosen People has often provoked antagonism from non-Jews. In the 1930s, as Nazis were tightening the noose around the necks of German Jews, George Bernard Shaw remarked that if the Nazis would only realize how Jewish their notion of Aryan superiority was, they would drop it immediately. In 1973, in the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, Yakov Malik, the Soviet ambassador of the UN, said: "The Zionists have come forward with the theory of the Chosen People, an absurd ideology. That is religious racism." Indeed the most antisemitic document in history, the forgery known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is based on the idea of an international conspiracy to rule the world by the "Chosen People".

In the light of these attacks you can't blame Jews who wanted to do away with the belief in chosennes. And some have out of fear.

In judaism, the notion of the one God became known to the World by the Jews. And according to Jewish sources, that is the idea of chosennes: to make God known to the world.

Does Judaism believe that chosennes endows Jews with the same special rights in the way racists ideologies endow those born into the "right race"? Not at all.

The most famous verse in the Bible on the subject of chosennes says the exact opposite: "You alone have I singled out of all the families of the earth. That is why I call you to account for all your iniquities" (Amos 3:2). Chosennes is so unconnected to to any notion of race that some Jews believe that the Messiah himself will descend from Ruth, a convert to Judaism. You cannot convert to a race. Once a person converts he/she becomes part of the Chosen People.

Why were Jews chosen? Because they are descendents of Abraham. And why were Abraham and his descendants given the task of making God known to the world? The Torah (first five books of the Bible) never tells us. What God does say in Deuteronomy, is that "it is not because you are numerous that God chose you, indeed you are the smallest of people" (7:7). Because of the Jews' small numbers, any success they would have in making God known to the world would presumably reflect upon the power of the idea of God.

[IntiRaymi]

35. Umm...Judaism is a religion...not a race.

What are you referring to??
"...Why were Jews chosen? Because they are descendents of Abraham. And why were Abraham and his descendants given the task of making God known to the world? The Torah (first five books of the Bible) never tells us."
If your family tree is so important, why is it claimed that it is not a race?
Ok, and this is where the absurdity of your position has become abundantly clear to me.

[Meshuga]

37. They are not a race

You not understanding my position makes your lack of knowledge about Jews and Judaism clear to me. It's okay if you know nothing about Jews or Judaism but if you are going to bad mouth them you should at least read up first!

For one, taking the bible literally is a Christian practice and not Jewish practice. Except for extremelly small ultra religious groups. But for Jews, who is to say if Abraham even existed? It doesn't matter because Jews look at the Bible as a guide not as a history book. The Bible is metephorical, for example, people who convert are also descendents of Abraham. :eyes:

We are a people or a tribe, not a race. Family tree is important to find out who is born into the tribe but others can join the tribe if they wish. But a person who is not born Jewish and converts to Judaism is considered Jewish as soon as they complete the process and this person's descendents are considered Jews and children of Abraham.

Go to Israel and you will see that Jews come in all colors, shapes, and sizes. You will see European Jews, Arab Jews, African Jews, Asian Jews, etc.

[IntiRaymi]

42. Sources, please?

I appreciate you attempts at mollifying a situation, but just posting your understanding of this is not going to be sufficient.
P.S. I live with a black african jew, and I myself suspect cryptojews in my family tree.

[Meshuga]

73. Source?

Here is one: the library.

Or a Jewish institution.

[OrechDin]

53. A Religion , an Ethnicity, and

a people..its the basis of Zionism, most Jews are not religious and even atheist but still Jews...

[tocqueville]

36. we are ALL "descendants of Abraham" specially the muslims

but obviously some are more "equal" among the "equal ones". And what about the people not mentioned in the "book" ? look how even the black Jews are treated in Israel, not to mention the Arab Israeli ? Are Asians OK? Have they seen the light ?

of course "the chosen people" is racism. It's RELIGIOUS racism. It doesn't have to be based on race. The Jews are not a race. They aren't even ethnically different than many other european or semitic people. They are a cultural entity based primarily on a more or less reinvented cultural identity and a common religion.
I agree with you that a lot of Jews don't see themselves as superior, but some do :

Orthodox views

Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, former Chief Rabbi of the United Synagogue of Great Britain (Modern Orthodox Judaism), describes chosenness in this way: "Yes, I do believe that the chosen people concept as affirmed by Judaism in its holy writ, its prayers, and its millennial tradition. In fact, I believe that every people - and indeed, in a more limited way, every individual - is "chosen" or destined for some distinct purpose in advancing the designs of Providence. Only, some fulfill their mission and others do not. Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parliamentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose."

Rabbi Norman Lamm, a leader of Modern Orthodox Judaism writes that "The chosenness of Israel relates exclusively to its spiritual vocation embodied in the Torah; the doctrine, indeed, was announced at Sinai. Whenever it is mentioned in our liturgy - such as the blessing immediately preceding the Shema....it is always related to Torah or Mitzvot (commandments). This spiritual vocation consists of two complementary functions, described as "Goy Kadosh," that of a holy nation, and "Mamlekhet Kohanim," that of a kingdom of priests. The first term denotes the development of communal separateness or differences in order to achieve a collective self-transcendence.... The second term implies the obligation of this brotherhood of the spiritual elite toward the rest of mankind; priesthood is defined by the prophets as fundamentally a teaching vocation. ... (The Condition of Jewish Belief: A Symposium Compiled by the Editors of Commentary Magazine, 1966)

Some Haredi Jews hold a differing point of view. Based on teachings in the Tanya and Zohar, they hold that Jews are "exalted above" or superior to non-Jews

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_a_chosen_people

I'll give you that ALL revealed religions are inherently racistic and anti-democratic. In essence "they have" the answer. It applies to Christians and Muslims too. But when you know that the cultural base of modern Israel is basically national-messianic (the Jewish socialism has never really fought that), it puts the "chosen people" in a dubious light despite the complicated denials frm Bible interpreters.

[Meshuga]

41. Nothing to do with judaism

If there is inequality in Israel or within the Jewish community it has nothing to do with Judaism or chosenness. You are trying hard to attribute these issues to chosenness but again you are wrong.

Just because of a very tiny group within the Jewish community hold fundamentalist and racist views you are generalizing all Jews and chosenness. I know, the views of the fundies within Judaism is very convenient when you want to badmouth Jews. Just to let you know, orthodoxy only represents 8% of World Jews and might I add that not all orthodox have that fucked up view. It is not fair to generalize Jews for a small group of nut cases as you are trying to do.

The idea of chosenness is an obligation that God only gave to the Jews to follow. Non-Jews have no obligation to follow these mitzvot and they don't have to carry the burden. Because of the idea of chosenness non-Jews are not obligated to follow Judaism and we are not allowed to impose Judaism on non-Jews.

Mainstream Judaism doesn't hold the idea that Jews are Superior. To say or even suggest that is either ignorance or dishonesty!

If after what I explained, you still want to hold the position that we Jews are a fucked up racist people, fine. Good for you! But I am done with this conversation.

[tocqueville]

43. It's interesting to know who's in charge in Israel

and the real background of the country. I sustain that the ideas you say are in minority, are not such a small minority. Which doesn't turn ALL Jews into a "fucked up racist people" (which I never implied), no more that Americans are all fucked up because Bush is their president. But it's a fact that a majority of Israel's citizens have supported and elected people carrying the national-messianic background, even under socialist periods. I suspect that plenty of Jews abroad and specially in America are genuinely not aware of that. It's very interesting to see the French TV reports about Jews leaving France to live in Israel and coming back after a couple of years "because it wasn't what they had expected".

The picture of Israel in the US is false. Or else this debate, all this sensivity on DU wouldn't exist. And accusing people that argue about "standard explanations" and pointing out very dark sides of the Israeli nation of being either ignorant or more or less antisemitic isn't going to help.

[pelsar]

49. darn facts!

But it's a fact that a majority of Israel's citizens have supported and elected people carrying the national-messianic background, even under socialist periods...

except its not a fact...gosh darn it!.....if its not a fact then its best to MAKE IT ONE!...thats the best way of keeping ones view even if its wrong.

[tocqueville]

76. darn facts indeed

1. David Ben-Gurion 1948 1953 Mapai :

was strongly opposed to the Revisionist Zionist movement led by Ze'ev Jabotinsky and his successor Menachem Begin.
He was also involved in occasional violent resistance during the short period of time his organization cooperated with Menachem Begin's Irgun, though he refused to be involved in terrorism of any kind, and insisted that violence only be used against military targets. Ben-Gurion initially agreed to Begin's plan to carry out the King David Hotel bombing, with the intent of humiliating (rather than killing) the British military stationed there. However, when the risks of mass killing became apparent, Ben-Gurion told Begin to call the operation off; Begin refused. But he did nothing to punish the Lehi terrorists.

2. Moshe Sharett 1953 1955 Mapai

In his book "Perfidy", Ben Hecht, claimed that Sharett purposely prevented Joel Brand, a member of the Jewish Agency's rescue commission, from saving an immediate 1,000,000 Hungarian Jews from certain annihilation. Hecht's claims, however, are disputed. Hecht himself was a supporter of the Irgun and of the Israeli Revisionists, and a vocal opponent of Weitzmann, Sharett and Ben-Gurion, and had therefore some political motivation in publishing these claims. The acuracy of the claims is a matter of continued debate.

3. Levi Eshkol 1963 19681 Mapai

With Egyptian President Nasser's ever more overt provocations, he eventually succumbed to public opinion and established a National Unity Government together with Menachem Begin's Herut party, reluctantly conceding the Defense portfolio to war hero Moshe Dayan, a close ally of Ben-Gurion’s and a member of his Rafi party. Israel’s overwhelming victory allowed Eshkol to remain Prime Minister despite never receiving recognition for his role in achieving it. In the years following the war he slowly receded due to ill health, and died while in office in February 1969.

3b. Yigal Allon (as interim PM) 1969 1969 Labour1
not very much, was a Labour man

4. Golda Meir 1969 1974 Labour
one of the if not the greatest Israeli PM

5. Yitzhak Rabin 1974 1977 Labour
Yitzhak Rabin 1992 1995 Labour
may he rest in peace. He tried and was assassinated

6. Menachem Begin 1977 1983 Likud

During the 1930s, Begin trained as a lawyer in Warsaw and became a key disciple of Vladimir "Ze'ev" Jabotinsky, the founder of the militant, nationalist Revisionist Zionism movement and its Betar youth wing. In 1937 he was active in Betar in the Czechoslovak Republic, leaving just prior to the German invasion of that country.
In 1948 Begin founded the right-wing political party Herut ("Freedom"), which would eventually evolve into the present-day Likud party. This was a move that countered the old Revisionist Party founded by his late mentor Vladimir Jabotinsky, but which had become a weak institution. Nevertheless, Revisionist "purists" alleged that Begin was out to steal Jabotinsky's mantle and ran against him with the old party. In the first elections in 1949, Herut won 18 seats, while the Revisionist Party failed to break the threshold and disbanded shortly thereafter. This provided Begin with legitimacy as the leader of the Revisionist stream of Zionism.
Between 1948 and 1977, under Begin, Herut formed the main opposition to the dominant Labour party in the Knesset (Israel's parliament), adopting a radical nationalistic agenda committed to the irredentist idea of Greater Israel. During those years, Begin was systematically delegitimized by the ruling Labor party, and was often personally derided by Ben-Gurion who refused to either speak to or refer to him by name, but Begin took it all in stride. Ben-Gurion famously coined the disparaging phrase “without Herut and Maki (the Israeli Communist Party)”, effectively pushing both parties and their voters beyond the margins of political consensus.

7. Yitzhak Shamir 1983 1984 Likud

In 1935 he came to the British Mandate of Palestine and in the same year changed his family name to Shamir. Shamir joined the Irgun Zvai Leumi, one of the militant underground Jewish organizations directed against the British control of Mandate Palestine. When the Irgun split in 1940, Shamir sided with the most militant faction, headed by Avraham Stern. in secret contacts with German representatives at Beirut the group offered to open up a military front against the British in the Middle East in return for the expulsion of the Jewish population of Europe to Palestine (see Lehi, Revisionist Zionism; Heller, 1995, pp. 85-86). To be sure, though certainly aware of the Nazis being rabid antisemites, Lehi members did not at the time realise that they would go as far as wholesale physical extermination of all Jews. In 1941 Shamir was imprisoned by British authorities. After Stern was killed by the British in 1942, Shamir escaped from the detention camp and became one of the three leaders of the group in 1943, reforming it as "Lehi". During his tenure, the Lehi was responsible for the 1944 assassination of Britain's minister of state for the Middle East, Lord Moyne; an assassination attempt against Harold MacMichael, the High Commissioner of the British Mandate of Palestine in the same year (Kushner, 2002, p. 348), and in 1948 the assassination of the United Nations representative in the Middle East, Count Folke Bernadotte who, although he had secured the release of 21,000 prisoners from German camps during World War II, was seen by Shamir and his collaborators as an anti-Zionist and "an obvious agent of the British enemy" (Gazi, 2002, p. 32).

8. Shimon Peres3 1984 1986 Labour

mostly OK but backed Olmert on the last one


9. Benjamin Netanyahu 1996 1999 Likud

Netanyahu was opposed by the political left wing in Israel and also lost support from the right because of his concessions to the Palestinians in Hebron and elsewhere and due to his negotiations with Arafat generally. After a long chain of scandals (including gossip regarding his marriage) and an investigation opened against him on charges of corruption (later acquitted), Netanyahu lost favor with the Israeli public
In July 2006, right-wing Israelis including Binyamin Netanyahu attended a 60th anniversary celebration, organized by the Menachem Begin Centre, of the King David Hotel bombing. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem complained, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated"

10. Ehud Barak 1999 2001 Labour

Barak's term as prime minister had several notable events, most of them controversial: Forming a coalition with the haredi party Shas, after Barak promised an end to "corruption" sponsored by religious parties. Haredi or Charedi Judaism, often referred to as Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, is the most theologically conservative form of Orthodox Judaism Meretz quits the coalition after they failed to agree on the powers to be given to a Shas deputy-minister in the Ministry of Education.. The passing of the Tal Law which gives a legal statute for haredi Jews' exemption from military service.


11. Ariel Sharon 2001 20055 Likud

In the 1940s and 1950s he seemed to be personally devoted to the ideals of Mapai (Workers Party of the Land of Israel), the predecessor of the modern Labor Party. However, after retiring from military service, Sharon was instrumental in establishing the Likud in July 1973. The Likud was comprised of Herut (Freedom), the Liberal Party and independent elements. Sharon became chairman of the campaign staff for the elections which were scheduled for November 1973. But two and a half weeks after the start of the election campaign, the Yom Kippur War erupted and Sharon was called back to reserve service (see above). In December 1973 Sharon was elected to the Knesset, but a year later he was tired of political life and resigned. From June 1975 to March 1976, Sharon was a special aide to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. With the 1977 elections near, Sharon tried to return to the Likud and replace Menachem Begin at the head of the party. He suggested to Simkha Erlikh, who headed the Liberal Party bloc in the Likud, that he was more fitting than Begin to win an election victory; but he was rejected. Following this he tried to join the Labor Party and the centrist Dash, but was rejected in those parties too. Only then did he form his own list, Shlomtzion, which won only two Knesset seats in the subsequent elections. Immediately after the elections he merged Shlomtzion with the Likud and became Minister of Agriculture.

I'll skip the sabra and shatila stuff

12. Ehud Olmert6 2006 Kadima

Olmert's childhood included membership in the Beitar Youth Organization and dealing with the fact that his parents were often blacklisted and discriminated against due to their affiliation with Herut, the opposition to the long-ruling Mapai party. However, by the 1970s this was proving less detrimental to one's career than during the 1950s, and Olmert succeeded in opening a successful law partnership in Jerusalem.


Results :

out of 12 Israeli PMs 9 have roots or ties to the revisionist or messianic zionism, herut, Lehi, stern etc... Only three can be said free" och that kind of accusations

"it's a fact that a majority of Israel's citizens have supported and elected people carrying the national-messianic background, even under socialist periods..."

Socialists have always been replaced by the Likud, and socialists have never done anything to really get rid of national messianists and often collaborated with them. National messianism is always latent in the Israeli society and not a minority movement. At least they always succed to get someone at the top. That was my point.

sources wikipedia

[pelsar]

89. what you dont know...

or either cant understand is the israeli political system....understand that, how coalition politics work within israel and you'll understand how a socialistic/nationalistic society can be in bed with religious parties.

but thats the reality of the secular israeli society and its culture

[OrechDin]

54. Most Jews are NOT religious..ESPECIALLY in Israel...

BUT

We are a people...like it or not...and thats what Zionisms all about...and we get to decide this and its no one elses business...



:bounce:

[Meshuga]

74. You are implying

that the JEWISH notion of chosenness is racism that means that Jews think they are better than everybody else even though I explained to you the maistream notion of chosenness. The notion of chosenness is what Judaism is all and why Jews follow the mitzvot system, therefore, you are making some fuckeup implications about us Jews.

It is one thing to criticize Israel for her actions. The other to make your implications about Judaism and Jews.

Because our conversation is not going anywhere, and your goal is you justification for disliking a group of people instead of learning anything from it, I'm adding you to my ignore list.

[WiseButAngrySara]

44. This post is beautiful and I'm responding to it before I read the other

responses to it, so as not to further cloud my befuddled mind. I had no idea of the historical significance of the words "Chosen People" and I can certainly understand your concern about the present use of the phrase. It is really a beautiful term, and IMHO, an apt term for the universal gift of the concept/reality of One God. All of the recorded saints (Christian, Hindu Sufi, etc.) have confessed that there was nothing that they could have done to be awarded the gift of the knowledge of God, that there was no way to understand the mystery of why God 'chose' them. But for some reason, they were chosen, as were the Jews "to make God known to the world" and more specifically, to make God known as One. This One God is the same God for Jews, for Christians, for Muslims, for Buddhists, for Hindists, for Ba'Haiists, for Sufists, for Zoroatrianists, for pantheists, for agnostics, for atheists and for all Nations! This is a wonderful gift, and I will never think of the words "Chosen People" without remembering this post tonight, both the good and the bad connotations and ramifications of it. The Jewish people should be proud to be the Chosen People to reveal to the world the Unity of the One God. And I'm really not being facetious here; I will never think of it as arrogant again. It was a gift to us. All of the world's great religions have the same core truths, yet we go to war over the misinterpreted particulars.

I thank you so much for your post MrWiggles, and I will read up on the historical ffacts in your first paragraph. You have enlightened me.

[Meshuga]

75. I thank you

For understanding it Sara and reading my post with an open mind! If you go ask a rabbi about the notion of chosenness he/she will tell you something similar.

Like any other group there is a minority of nutty people who actually see themselves as being above non-Jews but that is a minority inside a minority within the group.

We were (metaphorically) chosen to receive the Torah at Sinai and introduce the idea of one God. The Torah contains obligations for the "Chosen People" to follow in order to achieving Tikkun Olam (making this world a better place).

According to the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 2b), God offered the Torah to all the nations of the earth, and the Jews were the only ones who accepted it. The story goes on to say that the Jews were offered the Torah last, and accepted it only because God held a mountain over their heads! (In Ex. 19:17, the words generally translated as "at the foot of the mountain" literally mean "underneath the mountain"!) Another traditional story suggests that God chose the Jewish nation because they were the lowliest of nations, and their success would be attributed to God's might rather than their own ability. Clearly, these are not the ideas of a people who think they are better than other nations.

Because of our acceptance of Torah, Jews have a greater responsibility than non-Jews. Jews are responsible for fulfilling the 613 mitzvot (commandments) in the Torah. Non-Jews are off the hook. :-)

Non-Jews don't have the burden to follow the mitzvot system in the Torah unless they want to convert and become part of the Chosen People. People of any race can join the Jewish people by converting so I don't know where racism fits. If you think about it, the Chosen People are actually a choosing people.

But we don't proselytize and we are not actively looking for converts since a non-Jew can achieve salvation by being a good person alone. So to Jews other religions (or people with no religion) are just fine since there are other methods of people doing their part in Tikkun Olam. By becoming a Jew he/she would have to accept the obligations (the 613 mitzvot) that comes with being part of the Chosen People.

Take care!

EDITED FOR SPELLING

[WiseButAngrySara]

88. I really did enjoy reading it! Now, if the current Israeli leaders would

just take to heart the noble ideal of Tikkun Olam and Make the World a Better Place and stop acting only in Israel's self-interest, it would be grand! If B* and his neo-cons and the fundie 'Christian' radicals would take this ideal to heart, it would be grand! And likewise for all 'religious' and fundamentalist radicals and extremists of all kinds...

One can hope.


Peace and Take Care also!

(Edited because I misspelled noble as nobel, as in Nobel Peace Prize; a hopeful slip of tongue perhaps!)

[tocqueville]

31. What would you say if France said "we are God’s chosen people"

and acted like it. You'd call it stupid and arrogant, a crime against humanity. And call it racism. Worse is that there is a whole bunch that believes that the USA is "God’s chosen people"too. They are called Evangelicals and that goes even beyond that group. And they elected a president that believes it too and even "talks to God".

And when Osama or Ahmadinejad says about the same thing (fill in with Allah) the same "God Chosen people" call them "stupid and arrogant, criminals against humanity and racists".

Obviously some haven't understood that the Enlightement started 300 years ago and that at least two Revolutions (French and American) were fought on principles that DENY that mere statement :

"All men are born equal" not "in God we trust"...

[Meshuga]

33. Based on your

ignorance on the Jewish notion of chosenness you would be right. But you are wrong since the Jewish notion of chosenness is not what you described. People used the non-Jewish version as an excuse to create hatred for Jews. Who wouldn't be pissed at Jews if that was really what it meant?

I would recommend for you to go to a bookstore and get a "Judaism for Dummies" book and you will understand what the term is meant in its true context.

[tocqueville]

38. read post above before you call people dummies.

you quote only ONE interpretation of the concept. But even the "nicer" interpretations are very discussable.

"Far from being a license for special privilege, it entailed additional responsibilities not only toward God but to our fellow human beings. As expressed in the blessings at the reading of the Torah, our people have always felt it to be a privilege to be selected for such a purpose. For the modern traditional Jew, the doctrine of the election and the covenant of Israel offers a purpose for Jewish existence which transcends its own self interests."

this a conservative view. In other words it's basically the same stuff than the orthodox one with a reminder of duties.

the mere idea that a God comes and chose a people for whatever purpose or reason is revolting for the ones that don't share the idea. It doesn't matter if the "intentions are good".

I am sorry but this is nothing than medieval thinking. And if was only related to a groups worship it wouldn't be that important. But Israel was founded by the Lehi.

Avraham Stern crystalized the ideology of his organization in what was called the "18 Principles of Rebirth":

1. THE NATION The Jewish people is a covenanted people, the originator of monotheism, formulator of the prophetic teachings, standard bearer of human culture, guardian of glorious patrimony. The Jewish people is schooled in self-sacrifice and suffering; its vision, survivability and faith in redemption are indestructible.

2. THE HOMELAND The homeland in the Land of Israel within the borders delineated in the Bible ("To your descendants, I shall give this land, from the River of Egypt to the great Euphrates River." Genesis 15:18) This is the land of the living, where the entire nation shall live in safety.

3. THE NATION AND ITS LAND Israel conquered the land with the sword. There it became a great nation and only there it will be reborn. Hence Israel alone has a right to that land. This is an absolute right. It has never expired and never will.

4. THE GOALS 1. Redemption of the land. 2. Establishment of sovereignty. 3. Revival of the nation. There is no sovereignty without the redemption of the land, and there is no national revival without sovereignty.

These are the goals of the organization during the period of war and conquest:

5. EDUCATION Educate the nation to love freedom and zealously guard Israel's eternal patrimony. Inculcate the idea that the nation is master to its own fate. Revive the doctrine that "The sword and the book came bound together from heaven" (Midrash Vayikra Rabba 35:8)

6. UNITY The unification of the entire nation around the banner of the Hebrew freedom movement. The use of the genius, status and resources of individuals and the channeling of the energy, devotion and revolutionary fervour of the masses for the war of liberation.

7. PACTS Make pacts with all those who are willing to help the struggle of the organization and provide direct support.

8. FORCE Consolidate and increase the fighting force in the homeland and in the Diaspora, in the underground and in the barracks, to become the Hebrew army of liberation with its flag, arms, and commanders.

9. WAR Constant war against those who stand in the way of fulfilling the goals.

10. CONQUEST The conquest of the homeland from foreign rule and its eternal possession.

These are the tasks of the movement during the period of sovereignty and redemption:

11. SOVEREIGNTY Renewal of Hebrew sovereignty over the redeemed land.

12. RULE OF JUSTICE The establishment of a social order in the spirit of Jewish morality and prophetic justice. Under such an order no one will go hungry or unemployed. All will live in harmony, mutual respect and friendship as an example to the world.

13. REVIVING THE WILDERNESS Build the ruins and revive the wilderness for mass immigration and population increase.

14. ALIENS Solve the problem of alien population by exchange of population.

15. INGATHERING OF THE EXILES Total in-gathering of the exiles to their sovereign state.

16. POWER The Hebrew nation shall become a first-rate military, political, cultural and economical entity in the Middle East and around the Mediterranean Sea.

17. REVIVAL The revival of the Hebrew language as a spoken language by the entire nation, the renewal of the historical and spiritual might of Israel. The purification of the national character in the fire of revival.

18. THE TEMPLE The building of the Third Temple as a symbol of the new era of total redemption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_%28group%29

And that's exactly where the problem is. 1948 or not.

and Olmerts parents were members of the Herut (which is basically the same thing than the Lehi). Himself was in the youth organisation Betar.

the religious and political backgrounds of modern Israel are inseparable. And it doesn't matter if some secular Jews living abroad don't want to see it and always excuse the very at least dubious roots with some "you don't understand judaism"...

[pelsar]

51. trying so hard...

to make israel some kind of fundamentalist/religious wacko country...kind of a different angle to demonize them israeli jews...


18. THE TEMPLE The building of the Third Temple as a symbol of the new era of total redemption...which cult is that?...someones been sipping the kool aid

interesting....condeming a country as being run by religious fanatics when a simply look at the voting record shows its not.....now what kind of person ignores some basic and simple facts?

[OrechDin]

56. Based on this answer MrWiggles is right , `Judaism for Dummies`

is a MUST,It can be ordered on the internet from Amazon.com

[chimpymustgo]

72. Toqueville, this deserves its own OP. And a thoughtful discussion.

Please consider posting it. Thanks.

[tocqueville]

77. note that I never get answers

about revisionist zionism, national messianism etc... only that "I don't understand" and in the best case that "they are only minorities". The problem is that out of 12 Israeli PMs, 9 have ties or direct roots in these
movements. The Stern/Lehi/Irgun are horrible movements with a religious fascist ideology. They played a decisive role in the foundation of Israel and still exist in different forms.

the discussions I have had on this boards are starting to convince me that many American Jews are either not aware of that side of the Israel story or find it too embarassing to even discuss it. So it's dismissed as "minority standpoints" or more or less "antisemitic drivel".

[pelsar]

85. you dont get answers because there isnt much to answer...

try asking why the earth is flat....same thing.

national messianism?...perhaps you tell me, whats your estimate of how many israeli believe in it....i know about 3 (two are jews for jesus and one lives in hebron).

perhaps you should try to figure out, how is it that most israelis are secular and dont believe in the "god gave us this land"..stuff and YOU think we do?
_____

but i have figured out why so many here seem to want israel to be defined as a fundamentalistic state....it means it can then be delegitimized, after all no democractic state, with civil rights, with somekind of moral compass can also be fundamentalist...hence if israel is defined as racists/fundamentalist its on "that side of the line'

ho hum..just another version of debasing israel...i'm going to have to keep a list one day, it involves such things as:

israel the racist country (no voting/citizenship for arabs)
israel the apartheid country (must be destroyed like s.africa)
israel made up of European jews, others are 2nd/3rd class citizens by law
Israel made up of "fake" jews (real jews are else where)
Israel the fundamentalist country
Israel has no jews (all disappeared 2,000 years ago)
israel the militaristic country (ah now that rings true)

thats my short list and thats just from here....

[WiseButAngrySara]

84. I second that! all of Tocqueville's comments in this thread

deserve their own OP. I've learned so much on this thread, from BOTH sides, and Tocqueville deserves 'his' borrowed name, as he appears to be a very keen observer of human nature.

[OrechDin]

55. Unfortunatly we were `chosen` to suffer, and France is welcome to it,

It sure beats Frog legs and Bordeaux . yuk.

[tocqueville]

79. If Israel had respected the 1948 borders

they probably would have suffered anyway. But a least the right have been on their side.

[cali]

83. And if the Arab states

had respected those very same borders.......

It's troubling when people leave out one side of the equation.

[cali]

78. I usually admire your posts

even if I don't agree with them, and I've learned a lot from them, but this comment, particularly after the painstaking explanations of another poster, is baffling. You completely ignore both what "choseness" means in a historical context, and conflate it with unrelated concepts. I can't help but wonder what causes such a huge blind spot in such an intelligent and well spoken person.

[tocqueville]

80. I don't ignore it if you read me carefully

I just state :

the concept in itself is preposterous whatever "semantic translation" you give it. You gotta be a real exegete to grasp the theological differences betwwen orthodox and conservative Judaism. The practical impplications remains pretty much the same or at least can be perceived the same. It's just religious fundamentalism and I said it applies even to other revealed religions. Notice that only a minority of religious Jews reject the concept at all.

the way it's presented by PARTS of the religious Jewish establishment corroborates a suspicion of religious racism. The problem is that the political role of this "minority" is very important in the Jewish political culture, my posts about the Lehi and the Israeli PMs show it. It's not more "unrelated" than to discuss the role of fundamentalist Christians in US policies, past and present.

[pelsar]

82. but it does show massive ignorence of the israeli culture....

perhaps you should talk to some israelis who are secular and represent the vast majority to get an understanding of how religion fits in their lives, how it fits within the politics.

by choosing an article, pretending to understand what politicians believe (which in its self is an oxymoron) and then coming to a conclusion that israel is some kind of fundamentalist country is probably about as wrong as it gets....but hey, why ruin a good way of bring the israelis down to irans fanatics, hamas racism or hizballas extremists.

now that is probably the purpose based on my own theory here: If israel can be shown to be as racist and fanatic as irans revolutionary guard, Hamas moral squads, the muslim brotherhood, well then then we can debase and insult those israelis with our moral superiority and righteousness, and feel good about it as well!

[WiseButAngrySara]

86. Sadly, Israel is debasing her so-called "moral superiority and

righteousness" as I type. Religious extremism is the same, for ALL religions, and is so far from the core truth of all religions that it should not even be regarded as 'religion.' You supply the Hamas and Hezbollah with the almighty American $$$$$ and you would see them using and abusing their power in just the same way that Israel is doing currently, and they would do so with 'equal' justification for their 'God.' I don't quite see how what Israel is doing to the innocent people of Lebanon could in any way be 'topped' in terms of bestial immorality. What Israel is doing is racist extremism; precisely what you accuse her enemies of.

Christ spoke more than 2000 years ago, of the scribes and the pharisees; those that get caught up in the legalistic aspects of Judaism and those that take the symbolic meaning of the scriptures and pervert it to some literal and narrow interpretation that ultimately serves their own self interest. This happens in all religions. So, while the majority of Israelis may be 'secular,' most will believe that they are somehow superior as 'Chosen People' and forget the origins of this chosenness, that being, chosen as a gift to the world to reveal the Unity of Divine Reality. Israel is now slaughtering the children of their one God.

See MrWiggles excellent discussion above on "Chosen People" and the historical ramifications that have allowed this term to be used against Israel, and are now being used by Israel, IMO.

[pelsar]

87. such BS..do you even KNOW any israelis?

So, while the majority of Israelis may be 'secular,' most will believe that they are somehow superior as 'Chosen People' ...UGGH...what kind of filth is that...please show some kind of link or something that backs up such a theory...ANYTHING!!!!

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lithos]

91. Locking per DU rules

The use of Mr. Gaarder's editorial is extremely controversial given his rather long-standing "unique" viewpoints, choice of language and style when describing Judaism in terms of Christianity (Sophie's Gate, etc.). This controversy is now made much stornger by the use in the recent editorial of many "key words" often used and abused by anti-Semitic groups.

Added to the issues concerning this specific editorial are his attempts to link these unique viewpoints concerning Judaism as a way to define, describe and ascribe the actions of Israel. While it may be a natural outgrowth for Mr. Gaarder to write about such things, the combination of religious belief, use of extremely inflammatory language and the involvement of I/P politics is inappropriate and inflammatory given the framework and realities of debate on DU.

Lithos
DU Moderator