Defining ourselves as "pro" or "anti"

[Shusha]

Their treatment is an enduring badge of shame.

Their current treatment is a badge of shame. When you know better, you should do better. But I don't think it is helpful to continue to blame the current members of the group for the actors of the past. It happened. It was the culture of the times, sadly.

 

[Boston1]

Would you define yourself as pro- or anti- Israel and/or pro- or anti- Palestine?

What distinguishes the different designations?


I, personally, consider myself both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian.

There are those who support the right of return

And there are those that support a Jewish State

The two cannot coexist and is the most meaningful distinction there is no middle ground here that could feasibly be laid out. Anyone with any sense of morality supports the right of return, which is an inherently* anti zionist position.

On the contrary, Israel's "Right of Return" law for all Jews around the world, fits in well with Zionism.

To have a Right of Return you'd have to prove that you have a right to be there in the first place. European Jews cannot do that, just saying it doesn't make it true. If I as a Brahmin marry non Indians for 20 generations my kin will have lost their claim to Dehli long ago. There are only a couple thousand Jewish families that have any right to be in Palestine. The rest were are all there illegally from British occupation or immigration after ethnic cleansing.

So the sovereign land owners extending the right to close colonise the land is not legal, as that is what the Ottomans did in the 1850's. Then the LoN did the same thing in 1920 to the Jews. The muslims were given 99.9% of the land as theirs and still it was not enough. Please use the laws in place at the time and not more recent ones, unless you want to see them backdated even further until they affect you and yours.

That is totally separate from right of return

And again those people have no right to a state or even democratic representation. It was an illegal colonization. White men saying it was legal doesn't make it so.

Comparing the Ottoman's treatment of Jerusalem to British colonization of Palestine is laughable. Find better talking points you ethno fascist. This ideology won't last long here

Um, what ?

This is so disjointed I can't make heads or tails of it.

 

[Boston1]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

I notice your definition DIDN'T include location. Which is THE ONLY defining characteristic of the Arab Muslims in Israel vs the Arab Muslims in Jordan or Syria or the Sinai +

 

[Shusha]

I disagree. I don't believe in any "right of return" unless it's refugees evicted from their homeland (not their descendents). I don't believe a person should get any special priority or consideration when immigrating unless that state specifically legislates it - then it's a matter of what the state wants, not of "rights". You can always choose to return to where your ancestors came from - and that's your choice, but it's not a special "right" imo, that doesn't give you special priorities.

I am content to agree to disagree on this issue, then. Your argument is internally consistent and doesn't appear to have any double standards with respect to the Jewish people. (Not true of all people arguing for RoR, though).

 

[Boston1]

Then, surely the Palestinians have the right of return don't they?

Surely, they do. To a homeland of their own, with consideration given to both the Palestinians and the Jewish people in determining where that homeland is.

ok, that's reasonable.

But to answer your question, if there was an unlimited right of "return" - where would you draw the line. My ancestors came from Norway and Wales, among other places. Does that give me and my descendents an open ended right to return there?

Sure. As individuals whose national group already has a national homeland, why shouldn't you receive priority when immigrating there? My ancestors came to Canada from Ireland and Scotland in the early 1800's. Why shouldn't I get preference if I choose to return to my homeland? (This is entirely a different right than to return to a specific house which was privately owned and sold or what-have-you.)

I disagree. I don't believe in any "right of return" unless it's refugees evicted from their homeland (not their descendents). I don't believe a person should get any special priority or consideration when immigrating unless that state specifically legislates it - then it's a matter of what the state wants, not of "rights". You can always choose to return to where your ancestors came from - and that's your choice, but it's not a special "right" imo, that doesn't give you special priorities.

Before the Jews were there, there were other people....what about them?

Sadly, they no longer exist as peoples. If they did -- I would be all over granting them some territory for self-determination.

Based on your argument - much of America MUST cede it's territorial claims to the First Nations. So...where does this end?

While I wouldn't say "much" of America (or Canada), I fully and wholeheartedly support First Nations territorial claims. In spades. Yes, please. And with a side of fries and a double scoop of ice cream.

We're on the same page there. Their treatment is an enduring badge of shame.

But, to flip the coin, as it were, are you arguing that the First Nations peoples should NOT be able to have national self-determination? What is your reasoning? How might this reasoning apply to other peoples and situations?

No, I'm not arguing that.

This is pleasantly interesting

Quote

I don't believe in any "right of return" unless it's refugees evicted from their homeland (not their descendents).

End Quote

So now what needs to happen is determine who is a legitimate refugee and who is a combatant

 

[ForeverYoung436]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

Art is probably the only endeavor that Jews did not shine in, as opposed to medicine, finance, technology, etc. (Chagall is the exception.) This might be because of the Second Commandment.

There is a subculture of Jewish music in America that mainstream Americans probably don't know about (just like many Americans don't know about Christian pop groups, such as For King and Country). Stars such as Avraham Fried, Mordecai Ben-David and the Maccabeats are the big attractions in so-called "Jewish music".

Jewish cuisine consists of cholent (a sort of chili), potato and noodle kugel (soufflei), gifilte fish ( made of a combination of carp, whitefish, pike, and spices), latkes (pancakes), and ridiculously sweet wine. Several Middle Eastern dishes (falafel, hummus, tahini, etc.) have been co-opted by Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews.

Religion and traditions, of course, set Jews apart. No amount of puffing up Hanukkah will solve the sense of alienation most Jews feel during the Xmas season. In many European countries, Easter Monday and All Saints Day are national holidays. Only in Israel are Passover, Hanukkah and Purim the national holidays. All in all, I definitely would say that Jews have their own culture.

 

[Boston1]

Because the evidence, historical records, first hand experiences and reality show that this is generally the case in 99.9% of the situation.

Not when it came to the large scale confiscation of Palestinian land under the absentee landowner laws.

I've not investigated this one. But it doesn't feel right. If you are talking about land prior to independence in 48, the Zionists were careful to purchase all land. There was no theft.

If you are talking post 48 then the Israeli's won land through a defensive war. Perfectly legal at the time. It was still legal in 67 actually and then that ever so unbiassed organization the UN with its 25% Muslim voting block voted down the 0.5% Judaic voting block and retroactively made land gained even through defensive action illegal. Of course it didn't stand up to international law but yeah. Nice try.

So what land are you talking about ?

and I'd describe myself as pro Israeli.

I posted it here: Call Apartheid in Israel by Its Name

Because the evidence, historical records, first hand experiences and reality show that this is generally the case in 99.9% of the situation.

Not when it came to the large scale confiscation of Palestinian land under the absentee landowner laws.

I've not investigated this one. But it doesn't feel right. If you are talking about land prior to independence in 48, the Zionists were careful to purchase all land. There was no theft.

If you are talking post 48 then the Israeli's won land through a defensive war. Perfectly legal at the time. It was still legal in 67 actually and then that ever so unbiassed organization the UN with its 25% Muslim voting block voted down the 0.5% Judaic voting block and retroactively made land gained even through defensive action illegal. Of course it didn't stand up to international law but yeah. Nice try.

So what land are you talking about ?

and I'd describe myself as pro Israeli.

I posted it here: Call Apartheid in Israel by Its Name

Interesting twist. I'll confine my comments to the Israel thread. But maybe we should lose the accusation of apartheid given its been thoroughly debunked.

Cheers

Agree, using the term apartheid is inaccurate, but that doesn't absolve Israel of real and serious inequities.

Nor does it absolve the Arab Muslims of racist and bigoted violence against the Israeli's which results in restrictions to ensure the safety of both Judaic and Arab citizens of Israel.

 

[Phoenall]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

I would say that my culture embodied the following

Picnics with the family on a Sunday afternoon watching the cricket. Drinks with my friends on an evening down the club where we play bar games. Relaxing with the daily paper watching T.V and playing games with my children. Eating such delicacies as black pudding, cow heel, tongue, tripe, winkles, crabs, kippers and having cheese and onion in my sandwiches. That is just a small part of my culture, but the one that seems most common across the whole nation

 

[Coyote]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

I notice your definition DIDN'T include location. Which is THE ONLY defining characteristic of the Arab Muslims in Israel vs the Arab Muslims in Jordan or Syria or the Sinai +

No,, it didn't but I disagree with you that it is "the only" defining characteristic - I did list some other characteristics, and, like with Jews - it's open to objective argument. I don't think having a distinct culture that ticks all the boxes is necessary to define a people as a people.

 

[Coyote]

Not when it came to the large scale confiscation of Palestinian land under the absentee landowner laws.

I've not investigated this one. But it doesn't feel right. If you are talking about land prior to independence in 48, the Zionists were careful to purchase all land. There was no theft.

If you are talking post 48 then the Israeli's won land through a defensive war. Perfectly legal at the time. It was still legal in 67 actually and then that ever so unbiassed organization the UN with its 25% Muslim voting block voted down the 0.5% Judaic voting block and retroactively made land gained even through defensive action illegal. Of course it didn't stand up to international law but yeah. Nice try.

So what land are you talking about ?

and I'd describe myself as pro Israeli.

I posted it here: Call Apartheid in Israel by Its Name

Not when it came to the large scale confiscation of Palestinian land under the absentee landowner laws.

I've not investigated this one. But it doesn't feel right. If you are talking about land prior to independence in 48, the Zionists were careful to purchase all land. There was no theft.

If you are talking post 48 then the Israeli's won land through a defensive war. Perfectly legal at the time. It was still legal in 67 actually and then that ever so unbiassed organization the UN with its 25% Muslim voting block voted down the 0.5% Judaic voting block and retroactively made land gained even through defensive action illegal. Of course it didn't stand up to international law but yeah. Nice try.

So what land are you talking about ?

and I'd describe myself as pro Israeli.

I posted it here: Call Apartheid in Israel by Its Name

Interesting twist. I'll confine my comments to the Israel thread. But maybe we should lose the accusation of apartheid given its been thoroughly debunked.

Cheers

Agree, using the term apartheid is inaccurate, but that doesn't absolve Israel of real and serious inequities.

Nor does it absolve the Arab Muslims of racist and bigoted violence against the Israeli's which results in restrictions to ensure the safety of both Judaic and Arab citizens of Israel.

I wasn't talking about "restrictions" when I was talking about inequities in Israeli culture and law.

Add to that - I don't understand how you can have a truly equal and just governance when citizenship divides people internally. They aren't "Israeli's" - they are Jewish or Arab Israeli's - already divided along ethnic lines - further divided if they add a Christian citizenship category.

How is this a good thing?

 

[Coyote]

Then, surely the Palestinians have the right of return don't they?

Surely, they do. To a homeland of their own, with consideration given to both the Palestinians and the Jewish people in determining where that homeland is.

ok, that's reasonable.

But to answer your question, if there was an unlimited right of "return" - where would you draw the line. My ancestors came from Norway and Wales, among other places. Does that give me and my descendents an open ended right to return there?

Sure. As individuals whose national group already has a national homeland, why shouldn't you receive priority when immigrating there? My ancestors came to Canada from Ireland and Scotland in the early 1800's. Why shouldn't I get preference if I choose to return to my homeland? (This is entirely a different right than to return to a specific house which was privately owned and sold or what-have-you.)

I disagree. I don't believe in any "right of return" unless it's refugees evicted from their homeland (not their descendents). I don't believe a person should get any special priority or consideration when immigrating unless that state specifically legislates it - then it's a matter of what the state wants, not of "rights". You can always choose to return to where your ancestors came from - and that's your choice, but it's not a special "right" imo, that doesn't give you special priorities.

Before the Jews were there, there were other people....what about them?

Sadly, they no longer exist as peoples. If they did -- I would be all over granting them some territory for self-determination.

Based on your argument - much of America MUST cede it's territorial claims to the First Nations. So...where does this end?

While I wouldn't say "much" of America (or Canada), I fully and wholeheartedly support First Nations territorial claims. In spades. Yes, please. And with a side of fries and a double scoop of ice cream.

We're on the same page there. Their treatment is an enduring badge of shame.

But, to flip the coin, as it were, are you arguing that the First Nations peoples should NOT be able to have national self-determination? What is your reasoning? How might this reasoning apply to other peoples and situations?

No, I'm not arguing that.

This is pleasantly interesting

Quote

I don't believe in any "right of return" unless it's refugees evicted from their homeland (not their descendents).

End Quote

So now what needs to happen is determine who is a legitimate refugee and who is a combatant

And those are the only two categories?

 

[Coyote]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

I would say that my culture embodied the following

Picnics with the family on a Sunday afternoon watching the cricket. Drinks with my friends on an evening down the club where we play bar games. Relaxing with the daily paper watching T.V and playing games with my children. Eating such delicacies as black pudding, cow heel, tongue, tripe, winkles, crabs, kippers and having cheese and onion in my sandwiches. That is just a small part of my culture, but the one that seems most common across the whole nation

If I look at my culture - American....I find it hard to defiine something that is uniquely American in terms of culture rather than regional.

 

[Coyote]

What I AM saying is that it is a reasonable point of discussion and that opinions arguing one way or another are not necessarily anti-semitic because the argument is reasonable.

No. No, its not. There is absolutely no reasonable argument to be made that the Jewish people do not have a distinct culture.

I'm not arguing they have "no culture" - what I'm saying is it is perfectly reasonable to argue whether one culture unifies them all - or whether it's a religion unifying them...or both. It's a RATIONAL OBJECTIVE argument that doesn't imply antisemitism merely differing interpretations what what is a "culture".

Again. No. Its not a rational, objective argument. Go ahead. Try it. Give me a definition of "culture", a rational, objective definition of "culture' and we'll test it.

Ok. First let me state my position. I'm not arguing that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture - I'm arguing that a rational objective can be made, and making it does not mean it's anti-semitism any more than arguing for or against any other culture.

There are multiple, objective definitions of "culture" - here is just one.

What is Culture? | Definition of Culture
Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language: Hebrew is the language, though (until modern times) it was not a living language, but used for religious purposes.
Religion: they all share the Jewish religion, though it can be argued there are diverse sects.
Cuisine: I would say there is no such thing as a single Jewish cuisine that unites all varied Jewish groups from around the world.

From Wikipedia: Jewish cuisine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish cuisine is a diverse collection of the different cooking traditions of the Jewish diaspora worldwide. It is a diverse cuisine that has evolved over many centuries, shaped by Jewish dietary laws (kashrut), Jewish Festival, and Shabbat (Sabbath) traditions. Jewish cuisine is influenced by the economics, agriculture, and culinary traditions of the many countries where Jewish communities have settled and varies widely throughout the world.


Broadly speaking, the distinctive styles or cuisines in their own right that may be discerned in Jewish cuisine are Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, Persian, Yemenite, Indian, and Latin-American. There are also distinctive dishes from Jewish communities ranging from Ethiopia to Central Asia.​

Social habits - not sure about this one, what would you consider distinctive social habits uniting all Jews? Wedding traditions? Even that has considerable variation:
Yemenite Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jewish wedding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music: This one is also like cuisine, there doesn't seem to be one distinctive style that covers all Jews. What is considered "Jewish music" - klezmer - is considered distinctively Jewish, but is actually from the Ashkanazi/Eastern Europe tradition and is not common to all Jewish groups. Jewish music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arts: Similar to music and cuisine - is there a uniquely identifiable Jewish art that unites them all as a culture?

I think the arguments are objective and logical, and one can argue either way without being anti-semitic.

Art is probably the only endeavor that Jews did not shine in, as opposed to medicine, finance, technology, etc. (Chagall is the exception.) This might be because of the Second Commandment.

There is a subculture of Jewish music in America that mainstream Americans probably don't know about (just like many Americans don't know about Christian pop groups, such as For King and Country). Stars such as Avraham Fried, Mordecai Ben-David and the Maccabeats are the big attractions in so-called "Jewish music".

Jewish cuisine consists of cholent (a sort of chili), potato and noodle kugel (soufflei), gifilte fish ( made of a combination of carp, whitefish, pike, and spices), latkes (pancakes), and ridiculously sweet wine. Several Middle Eastern dishes (falafel, hummus, tahini, etc.) have been co-opted by Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews.

Religion and traditions, of course, set Jews apart. No amount of puffing up Hanukkah will solve the sense of alienation most Jews feel during the Xmas season. In many European countries, Easter Monday and All Saints Day are national holidays. Only in Israel are Passover, Hanukkah and Purim the national holidays. All in all, I definitely would say that Jews have their own culture.

Funny ... my mom used to make cholent (because it's a dish that can be made ahead and she had to work long hours) - if I remember it was a layered baked dish made in the dutch oven, with beef, barley, lima beans, potatos, carrots. Some other stuff maybe.

 

[Shusha]

Okay, so let's look at your rational objective definition of culture:

Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

First, please note that religion is included on this list as a VALID characteristic of a particular group and as such, the argument that the Jewish people are not a culture because they share a religion is in contradiction to your criteria.

You then go on to give reasons to exclude these characteristics under certain conditions: So let's look at it again, as an objective list of criteria:

Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language (except languages which are not living languages, or were not living languages for a period of time,or languages used for religious purposes); religion; cuisine (except cuisines which evolves from dietary laws, festivals and traditions; except cuisines which have regional differences; except cuisines which are influenced by external factors); social habits (except where social habits are not identical between all members of the group); music and arts. If one of these characteristics is missing or not readily identifiable the group can be excluded as a being a distinct culture. [/quote]

Do you see how this begins to sound LESS objective and LESS reasonable when you add all these qualifications? If you look at the definition you gave -- it is easy enough to see that the Jewish culture obviously has most, if not all, of these characteristics. Just as easily you can see that First Nations cultures are still cultures even though some lack a living language, share a religion, have varied cuisines and social habits and may not have a specific music or art.

Therefore, the search to attempt to exclude Jews from being a "culture" stems, not from a rational, objective, classification -- but from something else. Now it make not be antisemitism, per se. In fact, I think it is more likely to stem from a desire to deny rights to the Jewish people that other people have. Oh wait. That IS antisemitism, isn't it?

 

[Juicin]

There are those who support the right of return

And there are those that support a Jewish State

The two cannot coexist and is the most meaningful distinction there is no middle ground here that could feasibly be laid out. Anyone with any sense of morality supports the right of return, which is an inherently* anti zionist position.

On the contrary, Israel's "Right of Return" law for all Jews around the world, fits in well with Zionism.

To have a Right of Return you'd have to prove that you have a right to be there in the first place. European Jews cannot do that, just saying it doesn't make it true. If I as a Brahmin marry non Indians for 20 generations my kin will have lost their claim to Dehli long ago. There are only a couple thousand Jewish families that have any right to be in Palestine. The rest were are all there illegally from British occupation or immigration after ethnic cleansing.

So the sovereign land owners extending the right to close colonise the land is not legal, as that is what the Ottomans did in the 1850's. Then the LoN did the same thing in 1920 to the Jews. The muslims were given 99.9% of the land as theirs and still it was not enough. Please use the laws in place at the time and not more recent ones, unless you want to see them backdated even further until they affect you and yours.

That is totally separate from right of return

And again those people have no right to a state or even democratic representation. It was an illegal colonization. White men saying it was legal doesn't make it so.

Comparing the Ottoman's treatment of Jerusalem to British colonization of Palestine is laughable. Find better talking points you ethno fascist. This ideology won't last long here

Um, what ?

This is so disjointed I can't make heads or tails of it.

So no response then? Typical Zionist. It's ok it's not us who have to make the argument. Look around, mixed Americans aren't going to look kindly on racist Jews.

Since ethnic cleansing isn't bad why not in America? It's native land after all, we can choose who stays and who goes. Just like the Jews do in Israel right?

I'll remember to throw that in next time I see a zionist speaking in public

 

[Shusha]

If I look at my culture - American....I find it hard to defiine something that is uniquely American in terms of culture rather than regional.

I would define American culture in ideological terms rather than in physical ones. The right to bear arms and shoot someone who interferes with one's perceived rights, comes to mind.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It sure is fun watching antisemites dispute the identity of a people who have existed for 3500 years as a culture in one breath and then turn around and argue for the identity of one that was created out of whole cloth quite intentionally just a few decades ago.


It it even more fun when the dishonest creatures try to deny their obvious antisemitism.

 

[Boston1]

On the contrary, Israel's "Right of Return" law for all Jews around the world, fits in well with Zionism.

To have a Right of Return you'd have to prove that you have a right to be there in the first place. European Jews cannot do that, just saying it doesn't make it true. If I as a Brahmin marry non Indians for 20 generations my kin will have lost their claim to Dehli long ago. There are only a couple thousand Jewish families that have any right to be in Palestine. The rest were are all there illegally from British occupation or immigration after ethnic cleansing.

So the sovereign land owners extending the right to close colonise the land is not legal, as that is what the Ottomans did in the 1850's. Then the LoN did the same thing in 1920 to the Jews. The muslims were given 99.9% of the land as theirs and still it was not enough. Please use the laws in place at the time and not more recent ones, unless you want to see them backdated even further until they affect you and yours.

That is totally separate from right of return

And again those people have no right to a state or even democratic representation. It was an illegal colonization. White men saying it was legal doesn't make it so.

Comparing the Ottoman's treatment of Jerusalem to British colonization of Palestine is laughable. Find better talking points you ethno fascist. This ideology won't last long here

Um, what ?

This is so disjointed I can't make heads or tails of it.

So no response then? Typical Zionist. It's ok it's not us who have to make the argument. Look around, mixed Americans aren't going to look kindly on racist Jews.

Since ethnic cleansing isn't bad why not in America? It's native land after all, we can choose who stays and who goes. Just like the Jews do in Israel right?

I'll remember to throw that in next time I see a zionist speaking in public

Response to what ? You made a few half accusations and some disjointed comments. I couldn't realy tell what you were trying to say.

Asked for clarification and got attacked.

WTF

The subject is pro or anti and I assume the topic is Arab Muslim.

Go

 

[Juicin]

To have a Right of Return you'd have to prove that you have a right to be there in the first place. European Jews cannot do that, just saying it doesn't make it true. If I as a Brahmin marry non Indians for 20 generations my kin will have lost their claim to Dehli long ago. There are only a couple thousand Jewish families that have any right to be in Palestine. The rest were are all there illegally from British occupation or immigration after ethnic cleansing.

So the sovereign land owners extending the right to close colonise the land is not legal, as that is what the Ottomans did in the 1850's. Then the LoN did the same thing in 1920 to the Jews. The muslims were given 99.9% of the land as theirs and still it was not enough. Please use the laws in place at the time and not more recent ones, unless you want to see them backdated even further until they affect you and yours.

That is totally separate from right of return

And again those people have no right to a state or even democratic representation. It was an illegal colonization. White men saying it was legal doesn't make it so.

Comparing the Ottoman's treatment of Jerusalem to British colonization of Palestine is laughable. Find better talking points you ethno fascist. This ideology won't last long here

Um, what ?

This is so disjointed I can't make heads or tails of it.

So no response then? Typical Zionist. It's ok it's not us who have to make the argument. Look around, mixed Americans aren't going to look kindly on racist Jews.

Since ethnic cleansing isn't bad why not in America? It's native land after all, we can choose who stays and who goes. Just like the Jews do in Israel right?

I'll remember to throw that in next time I see a zionist speaking in public

Response to what ? You made a few half accusations and some disjointed comments. I couldn't realy tell what you were trying to say.

Asked for clarification and got attacked.

WTF

The subject is pro or anti and I assume the topic is Arab Muslim.

Go

You made an absurd claim about the legitimacy of Israeli and British colonization

Comparing it to Ottoman rule

Who has the disjointed thoughts? You understand the planet is filled with people who aren't white and are anti zionist correct? I'm not the one going against the grain here. You are

This conflict is no different than apartheid, Europeans need to share the land or leave just like every other settler colonial state.

Sharing the land means no Jewish state. Just like America isn't a white state. Without racial equality Israelis are no better than Nazis.

And Zionists deserve a lot more ridicule and pain than they get in this country. That will change soon though don't you worry. You can see it on campuses all over, little white girls getting ready to hurt people. Hahaha

 

[Coyote]

Okay, so let's look at your rational objective definition of culture:

Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

First, please note that religion is included on this list as a VALID characteristic of a particular group and as such, the argument that the Jewish people are not a culture because they share a religion is in contradiction to your criteria.

My argument was that religion alone isn't enough to define a culture. For example - is there a culture that applies to all Christians, once you remove religion?

You then go on to give reasons to exclude these characteristics under certain conditions: So let's look at it again, as an objective list of criteria:

Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language (except languages which are not living languages, or were not living languages for a period of time,or languages used for religious purposes); religion; cuisine (except cuisines which evolves from dietary laws, festivals and traditions; except cuisines which have regional differences; except cuisines which are influenced by external factors); social habits (except where social habits are not identical between all members of the group); music and arts. If one of these characteristics is missing or not readily identifiable the group can be excluded as a being a distinct culture.

Hold on a moment - let's look at this more closely. How objective are *you* really?

cuisine (except cuisines which evolves from dietary laws, festivals and traditions; except cuisines which have regional differences; except cuisines which are influenced by external factors);


Cuisine: A style or method of cooking, especially as characteristic of a particular country, region, or establishment

It would seem to me that it should be unique to the entire culture or at least the vast majority, not just geographical parts of it in order to be defining of that culture - yes? no?


Same with social habits, arts, music.

Do you see how this begins to sound LESS objective and LESS reasonable when you add all these qualifications? If you look at the definition you gave -- it is easy enough to see that the Jewish culture obviously has most, if not all, of these characteristics. Just as easily you can see that First Nations cultures are still cultures even though some lack a living language, share a religion, have varied cuisines and social habits and may not have a specific music or art.

I can see it with SOME of the qualifications but not all. It seems to me if you are insisting it only needs to apply to some members of the group then you're at risk of creating a really broad definition of culture. I would think each defining feature of a culture should tie the group together. When I looked up Jewish Cuisine it was all over the board depending on where they were from.

For example - using it so broadly, you could argue that there is a "Catholic Culture" and it could tick all the boxes despite the great diversity of Catholics around the world.

Therefore, the search to attempt to exclude Jews from being a "culture" stems, not from a rational, objective, classification -- but from something else. Now it make not be antisemitism, per se. In fact, I think it is more likely to stem from a desire to deny rights to the Jewish people that other people have. Oh wait. That IS antisemitism, isn't it?

How is saying there is not a universal Jewish culture denying them any rights? Rights aren't based on being able to prove one has or does not have a unique culture. I have no rights based on my culture - in fact, I would be hard pressed to define my "culture" so....does that mean my rights are denied?

To follow from your claims - then would that mean attempts to exclude Palestinians from being "a culture" stem from racism?