Thursday, January 9, 2014

Israel: The First Modern Indigenous State

Michael L.

{Cross-posted at Jews Down Under and the Times of Israel.}

I have been arguing for some time that we need to place the long Arab war against the Jews of the Middle East within the modern western civil rights paradigm.

If the west, or at least the western-left, honors the struggle among people of color for national liberation, or if they support the struggle among women for full and equal rights throughout the world, or if they believe that Gay people should be afforded equality before the law, surely they must accept that the Jewish people also deserve rights to self-determination and self-defense against our persecutors.

Over at Israelycool, Ryan Bellerose, a Native-American Canadian activist has a few words on the matter:
The actual working definition of “indigenous people,” (not the Wikipedia version, nor Merriam Webster, both more suited to plants and animals) for purposes of this essay is that developed by aforementioned anthropologist José R. Martínez-Cobo. With this as my foundation, I will detail why Jews are indigenous to Israel, and why Palestinians are not.

Martinez-Cobo’s research suggests that indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
The Jews of the Middle East are a persecuted indigenous minority.

There are two reasons why they are considered not to be so by most in the west.  The first reason has to do with the type of unacknowledged racism that makes up "progressive" political culture.  The second has to do with the misunderstanding between indigenous rights and what Bellerose calls "rights of longstanding presence."  The Jewish people are the only people on the planet who can claim indigenous rights within the Land of Israel.  The Arabs, as the conquerors of the region thousands of years after the establishment of Israel as the Jewish national home, are not.

Most westerners and Arabs tend to look upon Israelis as "white" and, needless to say, white people are indigenous to Europe, thus, as deceased White House correspondent Helen Thomas would agree, they should return to Poland or Germany or, even, the United States.  Of course, by seeing Israel as a white European implant upon Arab soil, both Arabs and western progressives implicitly deny the fact that ancestors of about half of the Israelis never left the Middle East to begin with.  Ashkenazi Jews represent the traditional leadership of Israeli society, but non-European Mizrahi Jews are an exceedingly important part of that society and, yet, their presence is ignored by western progressives who claim to stand for indigenous rights.  The truth, of course, is that both Ashkenazi and Mizrahi are indigenous to the land of Israel, whereas Arabs, "Palestinian" or otherwise, are not.

Arabs are indigenous to Saudi Arabia.

We are denied indigenous status by white western progressives because progressivism, as a political movement, is the single most racist political movement in the west, today, outside of political Islam.  This makes it convenient for the Arab conquerors of the Jewish people to claim indigenous status although they only truly have "rights of longstanding presence."

The real difference, of course, between the indigenous Jews of the Middle East and other conquered indigenous people, such as Bellerose's people, is that the Jews of the Middle East were the first of all indigenous peoples to take back their homeland.  Israel is a miracle for any number of reasons.  It not only survived the efforts of the vast hostile Arab-Muslim majority to destroy it in its cradle, it has thrived despite such malicious ongoing efforts.  From any perspective - scientific, economic, or social - Israel transformed itself into a successful European-style democracy and did so under the kind of intense hostile circumstances that no western European country has had to endure since the end of World War II.

Bellerose concludes:
If conquerors can become indigenous, then the white Europeans who came to my indigenous lands in North America could now claim to be indigenous. The white Europeans who went to Australia and New Zealand could now claim to be indigenous. If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless. This is somewhat peculiar, as those who are arguing for Palestinian “indigenous rights” are usually those who have little grasp of the history, and no understanding of the truth behind indigenous rights.
The Jewish claim to Jewish land is the claim of a persecuted indigenous people and is, thus, grounded within the kind of liberal ideology, prevalent in the west throughout the twentieth-century, that allegedly stands up for the rights of indigenous people all over the world.

Just as black people struggled for their rights and basic human dignity during the American Civil Rights Movement, so the Jews continue to struggle for our rights and basic human dignity within our 3,500 year old national home.  Just as native peoples everywhere seek to free themselves from the negative influence of hostile conquering populations, so the Jews of the Middle East seek to free themselves from the never-ending hostility of their former masters in that part of the world.

The so-called "Palestinian national movement" is not a national movement of an indigenous people.  It is a national movement designed specifically to overthrow the indigenous people and replace that people with the very people who conquered them and held them in something akin to servitude (dhimmitude) for thirteen long centuries.

Like indigenous peoples throughout the world, the Jewish people, too, are worthy of self-determination and self-defense.

Chloe Valdary agrees:



    Here's a great image from that article.

  2. Keeping in mind of course that this whole 'indigenous' nonsense is an outgrowth of two things. 1) the 60's ethos that primitivism is inherently good and anything else is inherently evil. And 2) it's really a racist expression of "The White Man's Burden."

    Both of them are racist patronizing expressions that brown people or what we call brown people this moment (and that can change) are not the genuine stewards of their own destiny and they have to be protected from De Evul White Mon on their little reservations and ghettos; like Potemkin villages where the rich white liberals gawk at them like zoo animals. It's about how WE feel about US. Not them.

    Because be clear 'indigenous' has nothing to do with point of origin. It's about a myth or who's genuine and who's not. Moreover and this is the crucial point - for a thousand years Jews have been portrayed as 'rootless', 'wandering'. Jew haters have used this as a justification that we don't belong anywhere. Never mind the reality that the Jews of Poland came there in the 13th century from what is Germany now. Never mind that the German Jews came there in the 8th century from God knows where. That's 'temporary' to the Jew haters who themselves can't trace their ancestry more than a 150 years back.

    Somehow if your portray yourself as someone yearning to squat around the camel dung fire at night, living in a tent with your 4 wives while feral dogs pick through the trash and you chatter about which one of you is the true descendant of Mohammed you're 'real'. About as real as Duck Dynasty.

    1. Ah, the question of authenticity.

      It is, as you rightly surmise, central to the progessive-left mindset and no one is getting hurt more because of it than the black urban poor in the United States.

      I cannot even imagine what it would be like to grow up in a subculture that tells you that education is inauthentic to who you are. How counterproductive and stupid is that?

      Ultimately, of course, the question of "indigenous" is ridiculous because we are all indigenous to Africa. Perhaps what we need to do is get everyone, from everywhere, to meet up in North Africa.

      The entirety of humanity will just line up along the southern Mediterranean coast and then someone... dressed up in a coaching uniform... will fire a pistol and everyone can go scrambling to claim their little bit of land anywhere in the world.

      We'll call it a reset.

    2. Thats the stupidest most moronic thing I have seen in a long time. first off indigenous status is not "nonsense" and it has nothing to do with "prmimitivism" your assertion is simply wrong. and not slightly wrong but catasrophically wrong.

      sometimes I wonder if some of you people are capable of original thought or if you just spout talking points that you see on youtube.

      First learn how to read, then work at comprehension, then try to come up with a thought that doesnt resemble feces coming out of your lackwit mouth.

    3. You're long on insults but singularly short on cogent explanations of what one might assume is a valid point (you do have one to make, right?). Or do you just like to spout venom because you really have nothing substantial to say? Don't worry, you're in good company. The world is filled of you ilk.

    4. I'll go ahead and say that I am sad to see Ryan Bellerose (if this is indeed actually him, which it does seem to be) go ahead and expose himself as, let's just say, one who is somewhat less than coherent when disagreeing with others.

      I may not even ultimately be too far off from agreeing with his ultimate points (if he has any), myself, but it's hard to tell considering the juvenile, raging, nasty, disgusting, uncontrollable anger with which he tries to express himself.

      He should probably seek an anger management class or three, for starters.

  3. btw we are not all indigenous to Africa, that comment is the very definition of " a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." go read the article being quoted, then stop, think and then post, in that order.

    1. Is not Africa the birthplace of all humanity?