- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #21
Copied from the other thread (my comments):
Have you ever heard the expression, "Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them." (Margaret Atwood)? I think it is relevant.
Arabs also created a number of laws which were unacceptable, actually much more so -- such as laws removing nationality from Jews, and laws stripping Jews of all their property and rights to own it. Some Arab countries still have different laws for Jews than for everyone else. (You know what that is, yes?) But more than that, the Arab nations created a culture of hatred and oppression and savagery that was so toxic and so dangerous that nearly all the Jews in those nations just chose to leave. There is no question of Jews returning to those lands. None. Its an issue of survival. Jews do not believe it would be safe for them to live in those lands. (Hard enough these days in Europe).
Contrast that to the situation in Israel/Palestine. While there are absentee property laws in Israel, there is no culture of hatred and oppression in Israel against the Arabs. Which is not to say there is not some level of discrimination. But there is no danger for Arabs in Israel. The survival of Arabs in Israel is not in question. They feel safe in returning.
Looking at it another way... Stealing a loaf of bread isn't "right". But if a person is starving, they might do it anyway. And, as an onlooker, you would have compassion for that starving person who performs what is normally considered an immoral act in order to survive. And you would have some level of discomfort asking that starving person to return the bread and starve to death. The immoral act thus becomes the moral one.
So are absentee property laws immoral? Sure. By today's standards, absolutely. (The standards have changed drastically in the past 100 years.) But it was and STILL IS a matter of Jewish survival. Not just the survival of Israel -- but the survival of Jews. It still is. The only way for the Jewish people to protect the Jewish people is to hold a sovereign nation.
What happened, as was normal in cases of civil war in those times and even later, was an exchange of population between the Arabs and the Jews. The exchange happened in the context of the conflict and it was mutual and should be seen that way.
It is. Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing. But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion. The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
Ok, that was 1948 - not that I agreed with it then either. How about now?