National
self-determination
Claim to a
Jewish demographic majority and a Jewish state in Palestine
The Zionist
claim to Palestine was based on the notion that Jews had a historical right to
the land which outweighed the rights of the Arabs. Israeli historian Yosef
Gorny argues that the establishment of a Jewish demographic majority was an
essential aspect of Zionism and depended on annulling the status of the Arabs.Gorny
argues that the Zionist movement regarded Arab motives in Palestine as lacking
both moral and historical significance. According to Israeli historian Simha
Flapan, the view expressed by the proclamation "there was no such thing as
Palestinians" is a cornerstone of Zionist policy. This perspective was
also shared by those on the far-left of the Zionist movement, including Martin
Buber and other members of Brit Shalom. British officials supporting the
Zionist effort also held similar beliefs.
Unlike other
forms of nationalism, the Zionist claim to Palestine was aspirational and
required a mechanism by which the claim could be realized. The territorial
concentration of Jews in Palestine and the subsequent goal of establishing a
Jewish majority there was the main mechanism by which Zionist groups sought to
realize this claim. By the time of the 1936 Arab Revolt, the political
differences between the various Zionist groups had shrunk further, with almost
all Zionist groups seeking a Jewish state in Palestine. While not every Zionist
group openly called for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, every
group in the Zionist mainstream was wedded to the idea of establishing a Jewish
demographic majority there.
In pursuing
a Jewish demographic majority, the Zionist movement encountered the demographic
problem posed by the presence of the local Arab population, which was
predominantly non-Jewish. The practical issue of establishing a Jewish state in
a majority non-Jewish region was an issue of fundamental importance for the
Zionist movement. Zionists used the term "transfer" as a euphemism
for the removal, or what would now be called ethnic cleansing of the
Palestinian population. According to Morris, the idea of transfer was to play a
large role in Zionist ideology from the inception of the movement and was seen
as the main method of maintaining the "Jewishness" of the Zionist's
state. He explains that "transfer" was "inevitable and inbuilt
into Zionism" and that a land which was primarily Arab could not be
transformed into a Jewish state without displacing the Arab population. Further, the stability of the Jewish
state could not be ensured given the Arab population's fear of displacement. He
explains that this would be the primary source of conflict between the Zionist
movement and the Arab population.
The concept
of "transfer" had a long pedigree in Zionist thought, with moral
considerations rarely entering into the discussions of what was viewed as a
logical solution—opposition to transferring the Arab population outside
Palestine was typically expressed on practical, rather than moral grounds. The
concept of removing the non-Jewish population from Palestine was a notion that
garnered support across the entire spectrum of Zionist groups, including its
farthest left factions,[fn 1][49] from early in the movement's development.
"Transfer" was not only seen as desirable but also as an ideal
solution by the Zionist leadership.
Zionism,
antisemitism and an "existential need" for self-determination
From the
perspective of some early Zionist thinkers, Jews living amongst non-Jews suffer
from impediments which can only be addressed by rejecting the Jewish identity
which developed while living amongst non-Jews.[54] Accordingly, the early
Zionists sought to develop a nationalist Jewish political life in a territory
where Jews constitute a demographic majority. The early Zionist thinkers saw
the integration of Jews into non-Jewish society as both unrealistic (or
insufficient to address the deficiencies associated with demographic minority
status) and undesirable, since assimilation was accompanied by the dilution of
Jewish cultural distinctiveness. Some Zionist intellectuals, such as Yitzhak
Elazari Volcani, even expressed an "understanding" of antisemitism,
echoing its beliefs:
Anti-Semitism
is not a psychosis... nor is it a lie. Anti-Semitism is a necessary outcome of
a collision between two kinds of selfhood [or 'essence']. Hate is dependent
upon the amount of 'agents of fermentation' that are pushed into the general
organism [i.e., the non-Jewish group], whether they are active in it and
irritate it, or are neutralized in it.
In this
sense, Zionism did not seek to challenge antisemitism, but rather accepted it
as a reality. The Zionist solution to the perceived deficiencies of diasporic
life (or the "Jewish Question") was dependent on the territorial
concentration of Jews in Palestine, with the longer-term goal of establishing a
Jewish demographic majority there.
Racial
conceptions of Jewish identity
In the late
19th century, amid attempts to apply science to notions of race, the founders
of Zionism (Theodor Herzl and Max Nordau, among others) sought to reformulate
conceptions of Jewishness in terms of racial identity and the "race
science" of the time. They believed that this concept would allow them to
build a new framework for collective Jewish identity,[60] and thought that
biology might provide "proof" for the "ethnonational myth of
common descent" from the biblical land of Israel. Countering antisemitic
claims that Jews were both aliens and a racially inferior people, these
Zionists drew on and appropriated elements from various race theories, to argue
that only a home for the Jewish people could enable the physical regeneration
of the Jewish people and a renaissance of pride in their ancient cultural
traditions.
The
contrasting assimilationist viewpoint was that Jewishness consisted in an
attachment to Judaism as a religion and culture. Both the orthodox and liberal
establishments often rejected this idea. Subsequently, Zionist and non-Zionist
Jews vigorously debated aspects of this proposition in terms of the merits or
otherwise of diaspora life. While Zionism embarked on its project of social
engineering in Mandatory Palestine, ethnonationalist politics on the European
continent strengthened and, by the 1930s, some German Jews, acting defensively,
asserted Jewish collective rights by redefining Jews as a race after Nazism
rose to power.[69] The Holocaust's policies of genocidal ethnic cleansing
utterly discredited race as the lethal product of pseudoscience.
With the
establishment of Israel in 1948, the "ingathering of the exiles", and
the Law of Return, the question of Jewish origins and biological unity came to
assume particular importance during early nation building. Conscious of this,
Israeli medical researchers and geneticists were careful to avoid any language
that might resonate with racial ideas. Themes of "blood logic" or
"race" have nevertheless been described as a recurrent feature of
modern Jewish thought in both scholarship and popular belief.[i] Despite this,
many aspects of the role of race in the formation of Zionist concepts of a
Jewish identity were rarely addressed until recently.
Questions of
how political narratives impact the work of population genetics, and its
connection to race, have a particular significance in Jewish history and
culture.[j] Genetic studies on the origins of modern Jews have been criticized
as "being designed or interpreted in the framework of a 'Zionist
narrative'" and as an essentialist approach to biology[k] in a similar
manner to criticism of the interpretation of archaeology in the region.[l]
According to Israeli historian of science Nurit Kirsh and Israeli geneticist
Raphael Falk, the interpretation of the genetic data has been unconsciously
influenced by Zionism and anti-Zionism.[m] Falk wrote that every generation has
witnessed efforts by both Zionist and non-Zionist Jews to seek a link between
national and biological aspects of Jewish identity.[n]
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário