View previous topic | View next topic

Bedouins in Israel

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

'yorz
862007.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:27 pm Reply with quote

Read and weep.
Can I say 'bastards' without being condemned as an anti-Semite?

 
exnihilo
862009.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:29 pm Reply with quote

Probably not now you've asked that question.

 
'yorz
862010.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:30 pm Reply with quote

Tough.

 
exnihilo
862013.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:35 pm Reply with quote

I'm not saying you're anti-semitic, but by using the term yourself you've suggested that the 'bastards' you mean in this case are the Jews and that you want to be called on it. If you'd just posted the link and said 'the Israeli government are bastards' you'd have been fine.

As it is, this is the sort of thing that happens all over the globe, there's growing population and growing need for intensive agriculture, there's very little room anywhere for 'traditional ways of life' however much we might wish there was.

Personally, I don't.

 
'yorz
862019.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:54 pm Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm not saying you're anti-semitic, but by using the term yourself you've suggested that the 'bastards' you mean in this case are the Jews.


I'm suggesting nothing of the sort. Your reaction to my deliberate question is exactly what I anticipated.

 
exnihilo
862042.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:17 pm Reply with quote

Except that as I've said, I didn't have that reaction. I predicted that was the reaction you wanted, quite why that's what you wanted is now the question in my mind.

 
Spud McLaren
862046.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:22 pm Reply with quote

Anticipated and wanted aren't synonyms, ex.

 
exnihilo
862047.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:31 pm Reply with quote

I'm well aware of that. A reaction was anticipated that was based not on the link itself but on asking whether the response to the link was anti-semitic. By positing it that way it was suggested that it was and that 'yore did not care.

I said that was not my reaction and I think it was a bit silly to attempt to get that reaction as though by doing so it would validate the original 'bastards' comment. Then I actually responded to the link, which 'yorz has ignored.

One might think the whole point was to get a reaction and feel smug and nothing at all to do with any discussion of the matter. But that would be most uncharitable.

 
Spud McLaren
862052.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:49 pm Reply with quote

Hmm, that's not the way I read it - I assumed that 'yorz was anticipating (predicting?) that if she'd said just "Bastards", then she'd have been accused of being anti-semitic, and so was hoping with the question to ward off this criticism. Although 'yorz's English very often surpasses that of others on this forum, it has to be born in mind that it isn't her first language and that a phrase in Dutch doesn't always translate with the same nuances into English. I could "hear" what she meant, but then I've had the advantage of meeting her in real life.

 
Efros
862055.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:57 pm Reply with quote

In the strictest sense Arabs are semites too, so not anti-semitic just pro-justice in this instance.

 
exnihilo
862056.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:03 pm Reply with quote

In the sense nobody uses except when trying to get out of being called an anti-semite you mean? The sense discussed ad nauseam on here?

Either way, of course it's a shame when something like this happens, but it happens all over the world as 'civilisation' expands and the wilderness becomes less and less, 'traditional' ways of life are endangered globally. And, frankly, given the squalor, the deprivation, the infant mortality, and the disease, I don't think it's such a very terrible thing that they are. Perhaps those so desperately keen to 'preserve' such ways of life should live them themselves rather than their comfortable, protected, sanitised, long, Western ones.[/b]

 
Efros
862062.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:12 pm Reply with quote

No in the sense of the original meaning of the word.

I agree with your sentiments regarding the Bedouins and the way some regard their lives as idyllic.

 
Spud McLaren
862066.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:16 pm Reply with quote

I wonder whether anyone has bothered to ask the Bedouin if they find it idyllic.

 
exnihilo
862074.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:33 pm Reply with quote

Efros wrote:
No in the sense of the original meaning of the word.

I won't rehash it, but a quick search will give you at least three different threads where that was discussed.

Quote:
I agree with your sentiments regarding the Bedouins and the way some regard their lives as idyllic.


No doubt many of the older people have strong feelings as that's all they know. I doubt that anyone has asked the children what they want or will bother to ask them further down the line. And there's no way to ask the next generation, but history's not overflowing with peoples who voluntarily give up comfort, medicine, food, education, etc to return to the ways of their hunter-gatherer ancestors.

 
'yorz
862079.  Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:41 pm Reply with quote

It's not a reaction I explicitly wanted, but through experience learnt to expect. Any critique of Israel is often viewed as critique of its Jewish inhabitants or Jewdom in general. It kills any potentially healthy discussion or argument.
So a reaction like "Of course" would have been refreshing.
Indeed I don't care if I'm perceived to be anti-Semite or not.

With regard to the article: the Negev is rather massive. Why it is deemed necessary to uproot these Bedouins is beyond me. It does not improve on their situation; it makes it even more desperate, if possible.
Quote:
[...]Bedouin will be compensated for up to 50 per cent of their land claims. But swathes of Bedouin internally displaced in the 1950s will be ineligible, while those who hope to receive compensation must not only agree to evacuate their lands but also meet complicated criteria, meaning that the eventual payout will be much less, according to Israel's Association for Civil Rights.

Quote:
In the 1970s, Israel built seven designated towns for the Bedouin in the Negev, persuading thousands of Arabs to move through a mixture of force and inducements. Rahat is the largest of these, home to 53,000 people. [...] The city has suffered from chronicle underinvestment. Rahat receives an annual budget of 153 million shekels (26.4m) from the Israeli government, less than half of the 380m shekels that goes to Kiryat Gat, a nearby Jewish town roughly equivalent in size, according to the municipality.

Quote:
Pre-1948, 90,000 Bedouin lived in Palestine. Only 11,000 remained after the new state was formed, the remainder having either fled or driven out during fighting.

Quote:
If Rahat agrees to take in 3,000 Bedouin living in villages on its immediate outskirts, the Israeli government will give it 100,000 shekels (17,300 for each one.[...] It is a bribe for the city. The refuse to develop Rahat until we accept the offer.


Expansion into the Negev should be combined with an immediate halt to the ongoing, illegal, settlement building in the Occupied Territory.
At least.

Edit: the fact that I take my time to compose a reply has nowt to do with an unwillingness to discuss. I didn't realise a direct response was required to ex's second post.

And (thanks for coming to my aid, Spud, but I can handle it) I think the question in my first post was entirely legitimate.
After the response, I would say: rest my case.


Last edited by 'yorz on Fri Nov 04, 2011 6:48 pm; edited 1 time in total

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group