#i like learning about the Yishuv | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

psychotrenny · 1 year ago

Note

Hi! May I share your thread on TikTok? The one on how Israel isn't egalitarian in its "safe haven" for Jewish folk. It was so well written and informed. I wanted to make a similar video about how it indirectly Stokes antisemitism, but it'd would be better to highlight Jewish voices as I'm a black muslim

Feel free to if you want but to be absolutely clear that I myself am not Jewish. I just made that post to share some oft he things I've learned in response recent tide of zionist propaganda that's been all over the western media.

If your interested in a Jewish perspective then many Jewish tumblr users have made a lot of very good posts and additions that covers a lot of similar matters. Just of the top of my head there's lesbianchemicalplant (with posts like this, this and this ) and determinate-negation (i.e. this one and this one ) There's many others of course but between tumblr's awful search function and my own inconsistent tagging habits its hard to keep track of what I've read and no doubt there's many that I just haven't seen

Several of the articles I linked are also written by Jewish people or centered on a Jewish Perspective. This theme is likely most prominent in this article, which is focuses on an interview with the scholar Benjamin Balthaser about Jewish Leftist anti-Zionism in the 20s and 30s

Also looking back on that thread and its responses I've realised a number of errors, or at least points where I employed poorly chosen language. I've conflated the Shepardic and Ashkenazis Old Yishuv in ways that I don't think are helpful; as the term is one coined by Zionist settlers to describe the various Jewish people already present in Palestine at the start of the settlement process and thus includes a number of different groups with differing histories and relationships to the land. I also used the term "indigenous" to describe them. This was in an attempt to outline how Jewish presence in Palestine isn't synonymous with Zionism (i.e. the creation of an ethno-state supposedly for all Jewish peoples everywhere) but it also had the effect of implying that they are exempt from participation n the Zionist colonial project which thy are very much not. My point was that there have been Jewish people in Palestine far before the era of Zionist colonialism but in the political sense referring to them as "indigenous", especially in implied reference to the contemporary political situation, was a poor use of the word . Additionally, while my readings on the early development of modern vernacular Hebrew reminded me very much of self-indigenization in terms of how it often evoked an ancestral connection to the ancient Kingdom of Israel (thinking of quotes from Eleizer Ben-Yehuda like "The Hebrew language can live only if we revive the nation and return it to the fatherland" ) it has been pointed out that this was very likely not the primary intention considering that Zionism originated at the very height of European settler-colonialism when such downplaying rhetoric wasn't really necessary. The (frequently forced) use of Hebrew as the spoken language likely had had far more to do with creating a new common culture and stripping Jewish migrants of their own so they could be more easily integrated into the state. While it seems to me that appeals to an ancestral land connection still featured far more in even early Zionism that in any other strain of European Settler-Colonialism (which indeed often made the "newness" of the conquered land a rhetorical point of pride, disregarding indigenous claims to the land without insisting that the settlers had any more rights than was granted with their force and diligence), I suppose that the term "self-indigenisation" may not be the most appropriate in this context and would be best restricted to the more modern faux-progressive forms of Zionist apologia. I'm sure there are many other mistakes I've made in that post or things I've overlooked, but these currently appear to me to be the most important once. Overall I'm honoured that you'd consider my writing worthy of such attention but would urge caution and insist that you seek out other sources in addition to it. Thank you for your time and good luck with the video

4 notes · View notes

galaxy-manticore · 1 year ago

Note

Is it okay if I ask what your palestinian-jewish origins are? Like, was your family there during the old yishuv? Or are your parents each respectively palestinian and jewish? If there's any sources to learn about palestinian jews too, I'd love to learn more. Thank you!

I am ethnically Palestinian; my mother’s side of the family is from Palestine, and my DNA says I’m Levantine. My maternal grandparents were born and raised in the West Bank under occupation before they immigrated here.

I am a Jewish convert religiously, though I consider myself ethnically Jewish too since my family is from Palestine/Levant. (Technically I consider myself to be Mizrahi.)

Both parts of my identity - Palestinian and Jewish - are very important to me as a person, and I feel they go hand-in-hand.

There aren’t many sources I can direct you to for Palestinian Jews, unfortunately, since the term was mostly in use *before* the state of Israel was established. But I still call myself a Palestinian Jew regardless.

2 notes · View notes

koheletgirl · 1 year ago

Note

anon, i dont know if you'll see this but i do want to say something to you and i hope that's ok.

we are taught that the '48 war started because palestinians refused the un suggestion. we are taught that it started in 1948. i know what history lessons are like in israel, i took them. got 93 in my bagrut too. when learning about the history of israel, no one tells us anything about the palestinians who were already here. the narrative we are taught is that all arabs are the same, so why can't they just go to one of their other countries? we are taught about the zionist struggle against the british occupation, but no one tells us how the yishuv forced palestinians out of their homes. and then we are led to think that the right of return is unreasonable, because if all the palestinians came back israel wouldn't be a jewish country (ethnostate) and then our lives would be in danger. because they don't want us here, because they want to kill us, because they will try to force islam on us (an extremely ironic concern given the current state of the israeli government). i know you know what i'm talking about, we were taught the same things. i'm asking you to open your mind to the possibility that we have been lied to.

Hey there, did you that Hamas attacked Israel first?

Did you know that you actually don’t know anything about this war and conflict? You blame Israel and yet you do not know how we tried to make peace with Arabs (of all nations and especially Palestinians) even before WW1 when Jews fled from Europe

Our war of independence was because Palestinians refused to the UN suggestion to divide the land so we could live together

They wanted and still want to get rid of us just because we are Jews

I’m not here to attack you, I’m just trying to explain this horrible situation that both sides are experiencing right now.

Hope you understand and best wishes

I’m just trying to understand why you hate Jews and Israel so much, we just want to live in peace and we don’t mind if Arabs or Palestinians or whatever live beside us as long as we can get along and not get attacked just because we have a different religion Believe it or not we live in fear only because Palestine won’t make peace with us and we attack only because Hamas attacked first If you lived here (Israel or Gaza) you would better understand both sides for what they really are

I'm assuming you're the same anon so I'll answer both these asks in one.

Firstly, I do not hate Jews. I rightfully hate Israel because of what it does to Palestinians. We all want peace in the region but it is Israel who continues to occupy Palestinian land after decades. It is Israel increasingly carrying out evictions and forced displacement of Palestinians from their homes, and it is Israel who keeps building settlements to further entrench its occupation. Not to mention, IDF keeps routinely killing unarmed Palestinians.

Claiming Hamas attacked Israel first takes away the focus from that occupation. You might say "Israel left Gaza in 2005" blah blah blah but Israel still effectively controls Gaza and has imposed a blockade onto Gaza. Also girl what peace are you talking about? So much of your "peace attempts" were a sham and even Oslo turned out to be a failure.

And you're brainwashed to think that this started because Palestinians' refused the UN partition when a lot of our grievances are due to the fact that Israel ethnically cleansed Palestinians from what is 'Israel' today. This was the plan before any war happened btw. Palestinians do not hate Israelis because they're Jews, and again it is ridiculous to claim so. Israel is the occupier here, these are not two equal sides. Violence is horrible, no matter who it happens to, but there is a large power disparity here.

Anyway, I won't be engaging with you any further. Have a nice day.

#i'm sorry it's just that those talking points are so painfully familiar #i had to say something. hope that's ok #israel #palestine

22 notes · View notes

rickwhite · 3 years ago

Text

Behar: The Hetter Mechirah for the Sabbatical Year

“When you come to the land that I am giving you, the land must be given a rest, a sabbath to God. For six years you may plant your fields, prune your vineyards, and harvest your crops. But the seventh year is a sabbath of sabbaths for the land.” (Lev. 25:1-4)

A Brief History of the Hetter Mechirah

As the Jewish people began to return to the Land of Israel in the late 1800s, establishing farms and agricultural settlements, the question of letting fields lie fallow during the sabbatical year became - for the first time in many centuries - a burning issue. With the approach of the sabbatical year of 1889, the Jewish settlers turned to the rabbinate to issue a hetter (permit) to allow them to continue working their lands during the seventh year, so that the young and fragile agricultural settlements would not collapse.

Three respected scholars met in Vilna and designed a hetter mechirah, temporarily selling the land to a non-Jew over the sabbatical year. The hetter was approved by Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spector, chief rabbi of Kovno and the pre-eminent Halachic authority of the generation.

During the following sabbatical years of 1889, 1896, and 1903, many of the new settlements utilized the hetter. However, a number of highly respected scholars vociferously opposed the leniency. Among the opponents were Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, the Netziv (Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin), and Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch.

The Sabbatical Year of 5670 (1909-1910)

In 1904, Rav Kook arrived in Eretz Yisrael, serving as chief rabbi of Jaffa and the surrounding moshavot. Leading up to the sabbatical year of 1910, Rav Kook took a forceful position defending the hetter mechirah. He penned a treatise entitled Shabbat Ha'Aretz which explained the legal reasoning behind the permit, along with a discussion of the laws for the sabbatical year.

While Rav Kook was an original and creative thinker, he usually took a relatively conservative position in Halachic matters. What led him to support the lenient position in the hetter mechirah controversy?

We can learn much about his underlying concerns from letters that he wrote during this time. The following quotes are from letters in the first volume of Igrot HaRe’iyah.

Reasons to Support the Hetter

While still in Latvia, Rav Kook and his father-in-law, Rabbi Eliyahu David Rabinowitz-Teomim (the “Aderet”, rabbi of Ponevezh and later chief rabbi of Jerusalem), discussed the issue at length. In his letters, Rav Kook admits that at that time they both opposed the hetter.

“From afar, when we heard the arguments of those who permit and of those who forbid, we both leaned toward the stricter opinion. But when the Aderet arrived in the Land of Israel, he saw with his own eyes that it is impossible to even consider not making some sort of arrangement for the sabbatical year.” (p. 258)

Seeing first-hand the precarious state of agricultural settlements was a critical factor in changing Rav Kook’s mind. He understood that full observance of the sabbatical year could endanger lives and would likely bring about the collapse of the new settlements.

A second concern was that the entire enterprise of the national return to the Land of Israel could fail over this issue. At that time, the nascent economy of the Yishuv in Eretz Yisrael was based on the commercial sale of agricultural produce.

“The Jewish Colonial Association (JCA) representative informed me that the JCA is preparing plans to buy much more property in the Holy Land. But if we decide that there is no permit to allow work during the seventh year via some legal sale, then the representative will be forced to advise that they should invest their money in Canada and cease supporting projects in the Land of Israel.

He also explained that [if lands will lay fallow during the sabbatical year], the Arabs will take control of Jewish land during the sabbatical year by grazing their herds on them and it will be necessary to take them to court.” (p. 285)

A third concern - and perhaps the most important for Rav Kook - was his fear that a strict ruling would plainly demonstrate that Judaism is incompatible with the modern world and building of a Jewish state:

“Even worse is the potential condemnation of Judaism and widespread rejection of Torah observance as a result of a strict ruling, Heaven forbid, in this matter. The anti-religious elements are hoping that the rabbis will forbid [all agricultural activity during the sabbatical year]. Then they will have gained a great victory. They will have demonstrated that by listening to the rabbis, the land will be laid waste, the fields and vineyards will become desolate, and all commercial ties for the sale of wines, oranges, and other agricultural produce will be broken - ties upon which the survival of the Jewish settlement truly depends.” (p. 258)

The Halachic Underpinnings of the Hetter

In his letters, Rav Kook also discussed the legal reasoning behind the hetter mechirah. The sale is actually based on a number of independent, mitigating factors, each one lessening the severity of working the land during the sabbatical year.

The most important factor in taking a lenient stance is the ruling of most Halachic authorities that nowadays the sabbatical year no longer retains the status of Biblical law. Since it is rabbinically-ordained, we may apply various leniencies, according to the principle of sfeika d'rabbanan lekula.

The hetter only permits those types of agricultural labor that are not Biblically prohibited, even when the sabbatical year itself is Biblically-ordained. Thus, planting, pruning, harvesting, fruit-picking, and perhaps plowing must still be performed by a non-Jew hired to work the field. This clause ensures that no Torah prohibitions are violated, even according to the minority opinion that even nowadays the sabbatical year is Biblically ordained.

An additional reason to be lenient is that our current situation is one of “undue hardship”. Given the precarious state of the agricultural settlements, not working the land would be truly life-threatening. In such cases, one may rely on a single opinion - that of the Rezah1 - who held that nowadays, without the Jubilee year, the sabbatical year is not even rabbinically ordained, but is only a pious custom.

Additionally, we may take into account the question regarding the correct count of the years of the Shemitah cycle. The Kaftor Vaferach2 testified that some farmers would observe the seventh year during one year, while others observed it during another. Even though the rabbis agreed to observe just one sabbatical year - and chose the opinion of Maimonides -this is only a convention. The doubt still remains as to which year is truly the sabbatical year.

Rav Kook also intimated that he had additional arguments to be lenient, but intentionally did not publicize them. He feared that, once institutionalized, the hetter would become too entrenched. The ultimate goal was not to circumvent the laws of the sabbatical year, but to allow the settlements to grow and prosper until they would be able to completely observe the sabbatical year in all of its details.

“On purpose, I did not organize everything in this matter to be fully explained, organized, and analyzed as it should be. Some justifications and cogent arguments I have omitted completely. All this was in order that the hetter should not become too accepted, but will always be considered a temporary measure (hora’at sha’ah), something that was permitted grudgingly due to the needs of the time. But when these issues are analyzed in the way of true Torah scholarship... the prohibition would become too weakened - and I certainly did not desire that.” (pp. 348-349)

Eye to the Future

Many of the rabbis who opposed the hetter mechirah wrote that not observing the sabbatical year would in fact jeopardize the future of Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel, since the punishment for transgressing its laws is exile (see Avot 5:9). While Rav Kook also looked forward to the day when the seventh year would be fully observed, he viewed the hetter as a stepping-stone that would allow the community to achieve that goal.

“We must recognize that we are obligated to strive with all of our strength to bring matters so that, in the end, the sabbatical year will be increasingly observed in all of its holiness in the Holy Land.... But how to arrive at this sacred goal? Which means should we use to attain it? This matter must be considered carefully.

In my opinion, we need to arrive at our desired goal precisely by graduated efforts. Rabbi Chiya Rabbah described the overall redemption of Israel as beginning slowly, little by little - kim'a kim'a [Jerusalem Talmud, Berachot 1:2]. So too, the spiritual redemption of establishing the Land’s holiness will advance in stages, step by step.” (p. 330)

One expression of this graduated approach is the distinction the hetter made between those agricultural activities that are prohibited Biblically and those prohibited rabbinically. “We should be like one who saves his possessions from the fire,” Rav Kook explained. “Whatever is more precious and holier [i.e., Biblically-prohibited labor] must be rescued first.”

This distinction also provides a solution to the danger of punishment by exile for not observing the sabbatical year. Such a severe penalty could only apply to transgressing Biblically-ordained prohibitions.3

The Hetter for Farmers and Consumers

What about those who did not wish to rely on the hetter mechirah? Here, Rav Kook distinguished between farmers and consumers.

Rav Kook was very supportive of farmers who did not wish to rely on the hetter. When he heard that the JCA was using the hetter to force farmers to work on the sabbatical year, he became acutely distressed and informed the JCA that the hetter would become invalid under such circumstances. Rav Kook also spoke of setting up a special fund to support these farmers.

On the other hand, Rav Kook was critical of consumers who chose to be stringent in the sabbatical year by buying produce only from non-Jewish farmers. One cannot take on stringencies at the expense of others:

“Certainly it is not proper to look for leniencies and loopholes by purchasing produce from non-Jews, in a situation when this will cause loss of income from Jewish farmers and undermine their livelihood. In general, in any situation where we desire to be strict for ourselves, it is correct to make certain that this stringency does not induce any negative repercussions of financial loss or disrepute for others.” (p. 258)

1 Rabbi Zerachiah HaLevi Gerondi (1125-1186).

2 Rabbi Eshtori HaParchi (1282-1357).

3 Cf Sha’agat Aryeh sec. 24.

#aliyah1800 #Israel #Shmittah Year #Vayikra25:1-4 #hetter

0 notes

jerusalism · 7 years ago

Text

Dani Stieglitz interviewed by Josh Friedlander

JF: What made you want to be a writer? Did you always want to?

DS: Creating stories is something that has always come naturally to me. I have a vivid imagination. It probably also helped that my parents were both educators, with my father specializing in Elementary Education.

JF: How has the immigrant experience affected your writing? Is it ‘Israeli'? Does the rhythm of Hebrew impact your English prose in any way?

DS: I don't think the immigrant experience itself has affected my writing. My genres of choice are fantasy and science fiction. However, I used my aliyah benefits to get my Masters in Creative Writing at Bar Ilan University. That certainly helped me to find my voice as a writer.

JF: Which city/yishuv do you live in? Do you have a community of writers there?

DS: I live in Jerusalem, in the Katamonim neighborhood. I'm connected with a lot of writers and often meet with some of them about once a month for writing sprints that can go until well after midnight when the muses are calling to all of us.

JF: Which authors are your fantasy/sci-fi inspirations? Do you enjoy the blank canvas that these genres offer you? Judaism too has its ur-narratives, its stories overspilling the bounds of the real world. Do you think that your Jewish background ties in with what you write? (Many have regarded Asimov's Foundation saga as his own meditation on Jewish history.)

DS: I'm a big fan of Neil Gaiman, particularly his graphic novel, "Sandman". I also admire JK Rowling - she really made the world of Harry Potter come to life. I LOVE the blank canvas that these genres offer me. I can create anything that my imagination comes up with and that potentially has no limits - I just need to respect the rules that I establish for the world I create. I'm sure my Jewish background plays a role. While in some ways that role might be more passive, sometimes I'll name things based on the Hebrew equivalent of the word. (For instance - I named a dessert in a potential novel I'm writing, "Midbar".)

JF: Your writing embraces narrative and story. How important is form to you, on a word-sentence-paragraph level? Does the content dictate the form?

DS: As I mentioned above, "I can create anything that my imagination comes up with and that potentially has no limits - I just need to respect the rules that I establish for the world I create." There must always be rules. If I create a world where anything goes then the reader can't see the same continuity. It's not as clear as it might be in the head of the author. The challenge is to bring your world alive for everyone else. In order to do that you have to have rules and explain those rules properly. Form is important to me and it's something I'm constantly learning and re-learning. In my early days as a writer I tried to write entire novels without truly having a grasp on certain writing styles. When studying for my MA in Creative Writing we were required to only submit short stories. This helped me to better learn and understand how to create a clear beginning, middle, and end. I also learned how to be more clear and concise. What to focus on and what to focus less on. How to show more and tell less. As I write a lot aimed towards Young Adult, I try to follow the rules of the Young Adult mold. To better understand that, I read a lot of Young Adult books. It helps me better understand how to unfold a Young Adult story. I also learn how to do things better, like keeping my sentences short and sweet. So in this sense, yes, the content dictates the form.

JF: You draw a lot from the world of comics. How important do you think the recent wave of Hollywood comic book adaptations has been, in literary terms? Do you think we are closer to viewing them as "serious" literature?

DS: Firstly, I'm in absolute heaven that comic books are coming to the big screen. These were my childhood heroes and now I'm seeing them come to life. When I collected comic books as a child, it was not the "cool" thing to do. Now going to see a comic book movie is the "cool" thing to do. As a result, I think this does bring more respect to comic books as a literary form. In many ways I think that comic books are already considered serious literature, particularly things written in the form of Graphic Novels. More and more colleges are offering the Graphic Novel as a course. This alone is recognition of it as serious literature. On a side-note, I hold comic books to a higher standard now versus how I did as a kid. If the character, writer or writing did not mature with me, then it's not something I go back to. As an adult I'm looking for smart and as realistic as a comic book can be - such as larger than life characters having normal, day-to-day problems.

This interview was conducted in preparation for the Jerusalism event “2&2″ which took place at the Abraham Hostel in Jerusalem on December 4, 2017.

#jerusalism #israeliliterature #interview #author interview

0 notes

historicity-was-already-taken · 3 years ago

Text

What I’ve learned so far that’s helped me to contextualize and understand some of the big questions I’ve had about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and the construction of its memory:

The memory of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was appropriated and distorted by the pre-State Zionist party leaders residing in Mandatory Palestine during and after WW2. After the war, that appropriated memory was built into official State memory and symbolism.

This was allowed to happen because the immensely complex and multifaceted political world of interwar European Jewry was quite literally destroyed by the Holocaust, leaving survivors who various States sought to use as mouthpieces, and a right-of-center variant of Zionism pre-dominating the rest in Mandatory Palestine.

Before the Holocaust, a massive variety of ideological parties embracing distinct levels, flavors, and varieties of Zionism existed among European Jewry, particularly in Poland, which had the largest population of Jews outside of the USA on the outset of WW2.

Some of these forms of Zionism were intensely communist, some deeply socialist, some so right wing that Zionists from other parties called them “Jewish fascists,” and other leftist parties which questioned the validity of forms of Zionism which hinged on the assumption (unspoken or otherwise) of Palestinian Arabs functioning as a population of second class citizens and/or cheap labor. There were also Jewish political strands which wholesale rejected Zionism, and parties which preached internationalism. And within those, you had subsequent ideological divides.

The power struggle over leadership in Mandatory Palestine during and after WW2 is the genesis of the construction of the memory of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising as an inherently masculine, Zionist moment on par with the last stand at Masada as recounted in Josephus’ The War of the Jews.

After the war, and before and after the creation of the State of Israel, members of the Yishuv—meaning, the Jewish population of Mandatory Palestine and its party leadership—perceived Holocaust survivors and their trauma as weak, “feminine,” and embarrassing, all while building the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising into its foundational mythos.

No conclusion, just a verbalization of what I’ve learned so far regarding questions I’ve had since the beginning of this project pertaining to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and its memory.

Please note that this is not a political post about the contemporary Israeli/Palestinian Conflict, though I can understand why it may give that impression, as much of the memory building I discuss remains an inherent part of the Israeli ideological state apparatus, and as this post addresses concerns regarding the status of Palestinian Arabs should pre-State forms of Zionism achieve their goals.

If you would like to use this post as a springboard for contemporary political discourse, you are free to do so. However, I ask that you please do so through copy and pasting this post into a new one instead of directly reblogging, as I do not want to see that variety of political discourse in my “Activity” section due to the immense toxicity that discourse tends to take on when it occurs via social media channels. Thank you.

#warsaw ghetto uprising #Holocaust #ww2 #political history #Jewish history #memory studies

47 notes · View notes

historicity-was-already-taken · 2 years ago

Text

One of the most interesting sub-facets of my work on the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising has been learning about the incredibly diverse political world of interwar Polish Jewry. If we take Communism, Socialism, Bundism, and religious parties out of the picture for a moment and focus strictly on the Zionist groups, the complexity of the political strains was incredible. Social Zionists, Communist Zionists, pioneering Zionists, mainstream bougie Zionsts, far right Zionists, Zionists who worried that, if not done carefully, Zionism could create a society which forced Palestinian Arabs into the position of second class citizens (this, if I’m remembering correctly, was the Left Poalei Zion) etc.

All these groups and strains of Zionism existed basically through the deportation of the vast majority of the Warsaw Ghetto’s inhabitants to Treblinka, and through the creation of the Jewish Fighting Organization.

But during the ghetto period and the mass deportations to Treblinka, the yishuv--the governmental body of the pioneering Zionist groups in Palestine--ignored/couldn’t do anything about all the frantic letters my girl Zivia Lubetkin sent them begging for help. After the war, when the first survivors made their way to Palestine, the settlers already there didn’t really grasp the enormity of what had happened, and shamed the survivors for not fitting into the Tough Pioneering Zionist vibes.

This particular group of Zionists became the dominant party wrt to Palestine during/after the war because...Hitler destroyed the rest, and became the dominant political party involved with the founding of the State of Israel. They couldn’t cope with the “survivor/victim” narrative of the Holocaust, so the pre-State political base and founding party of Israel took on the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising as a symbol of of Jewish fighting ability and resilience along the same lines as the so-called “last stand” at Masada.

Therefore, a lot of Israeli state-building mythology is deeply entwined with the reconstruction of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising as an inherently Zionist movement demonstrating the militaristic ability and toughness of the Jews/Zionists.

This appropriation of the Uprising in national mythmaking necessarily erases the many other forms of Zionism represented among the Ghetto Fighters, but also the influence, presence, and importance of Bundists, Socialists, Communists, and other non-Zionist Jewish political groups in the Jewish Fighting Organization, and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

That’s Israeli memory construction. In the United States the memory has been constructed differently, and more in line with the American love of happy endings and Good Guys triumphing over Bad Guys. Neither memory construction is....accurate, and the cultural and artistic properties produced within both cultural spaces largely ignore, disregard, and downplay the role of women in the resistance.

So, while dealing with historical/historiographic/memory related issues surrounding Israel and, inherently, The Conflict, is never something I particularly enjoy engaging with, but this is all why it becomes necessary when examining issues of Holocaust and memory.

Please note that this post necessarily oversimplifies several issues as I try to keep things under book-length around here. As always, if you’d like to use this post as a jump-off for I/P political discourse, please copy and paste into a new post--I am allergic to that discourse as it asserts itself online, and I don’t want to see it in my notes. Thanks.

Me: I’m a Holocaust historian. I don’t fuck with Israel; that’s not my field.

Holocaust Memory Studies:

#history #holocaust history #memory studies #Warsaw Ghetto Uprising #israeli history #history of zionism

95 notes · View notes