82
by Ranxerox_Archive
Gramsci's point kind of gets at the heart of the issue: Israel was not created by war or the natural accumulation of a population over years and years of culture-creating migration, etc. Israel hasn't conquered anyone. They were assissted in a land grab that had been in the works for a generation, they were gifted a border which only they and outsiders agreed with (which is a profound act of violence), and they have been fighting ever since.
Israel is a cool place no doubt, the place in the ME I would most likely want to visit and stay. Beaches, modern cities, beautiful women, and Jewish culture, which has much to recommend it. However, Israel was built in the wrong place. A Jewish state sounds like a great idea, but a Jewish state, created in a most non-democratic fashion, butressed by many thousands of immigrants and billions in foreign aid, erected behind disputed borders and around Muslim holy sites (I realize it is a holy place for Jews, as well), and laid out in the midst of Arab/Muslim lands and majorities, sounds like endless war. The Zionists got what they wanted, everything they expected. They knew that they would have to have a great army and they knew that, given Arab backwardness, it was possible with Western assistance. Israel is, as Gramsci suggests, the result of a strong arm land grab. However, he is wrong to suggest that Israel conquered an enemy or opponent. They repelled, they kept some land. Still, maintaining that land and other safe zones has proven difficult.
One day a piece of destructive, highly mobile technology is going to come along and Israel is going to take a tremendous, staggering hit. It is impossible to believe otherwise. They will never be accepted and everything they do to protect themselves, or retaliate, or expand, or punish, etc., creates more hostility. The greater the military success the deeper the wounds and hatred and taste for revenge that arises on the other side. The very existence of a Jewish state in that area of the world, supported without balance by the US, is a grave affront to millions who support thousands willing to take violent action.
War is diplomacy by another name. Terror is war by another name. Whether it is justified depends on your beliefs, values, understanding of the context, etc.
Neither side is right, per se. It is a land dispute and both have claims they hold very dearly. I find my country's involvement to be distasteful as I think that the initial act of creating Israel was improper on the part of the UN and the other Western powers, especially Britain, which abdicated responsibility. That said, it makes no sense to create and maintain Israel in the way it has been forwarded (land grab, foreign bodies and dollars, religion, war, settlements, harrassment, marginalization of the 'other,' etc.) while also hoping for peace. Israel's claims of of a peace-loving high-ground are propaganda intended for jugheads. The very nature of its creation and maintenance requires violence.
It's in the wrong place.
