posted on May, 17 2013 @ 07:51 PM
The vast majority of laymen don't give a damn about theology, and society doesn't admit the relevance of religious theology into political
I get some of you are theology buffs, and the logic from the Christian perspective which "justifies" Israel's existence might be interesting - as
an academic past time - but in real life, it doesn't matter. Nobody cares about it.
What matters at base is the anthropological relevance of Israel to the Jewish people. It's the Jewish peoples connection at a cultural, ethnic and
religious level, which mandates Israel's right to exist. Not what religion has to say. Religions will say what religions will say. Islam will carry
on their internal myth-telling of the Jews being evil and the children of apes and pigs, and Orthodox Jews will continue on in their narrative of the
world plotting to take away Israel's existence. Both agree on the same situation: an apocalyptic face-off. But no rational person wants to see that
happen. Rational people ignore the stories the fundamentalists tell each other, and pay attention to the real anthropologically relevant facts which
pertain to both sides.
Jews have the long-term connection to Israel (aka Palestine, aka Judea), and based on this strong historical, spiritually felt and communally
fostered, connection, the Jews are entitled to settle themselves as a nation in today's Judea.
At the same time, in the "short-term", that is, the last few hundred years, Arabs have been the predominant ethnic category living in Palestine.
When the Zionists had designs to take the land back, through land purchases, Arabs were the main owners of the land. I'm sure, as owners, as people
who had established their own, albeit, less culturally preeminent, and emotionally charged, connection to the land, they feel that the Jewish inroad
into Palestine feels like they don't deserve to be there.
So were dealing with two people approaching this question from two different perspectives - both relevant and deserving consideration. The two state
solution seeks to reconcile this issue so that both sides, Jews and Palestinian Arabs, can live together as equals.
This was, by the way, the basic intentions of the 1947 UN special commission to Palestine. But unfortunately, it didn't work out, mainly because the
Arabs flat out refused to acknowledge any Jewish connection to Palestine, and this has been reflected in the outright bizarre denials from the Waqf
(religious authorities) supported by the PA, that the ancient Jewish temple - despite the existence of Herodian architecture and sundry archeological
finds - never existed. When one side is going this far to deny the historical relevance of Jews to Palestine - a patently inane claim - while still
somehow maintaining the religious view that Jews are the sons of "pigs and apes" - this situation turns out to be far more intractable than
initially expected. And the Bible calls the Jews stiff necked? I'm sorry, the Arabs have far outdone them. They don't want any Jewish state of any
size in their midst, and there's simply no negotiating with them.
So this brings us to the status quo. What to do with Israel and Palestine. The Israelis - who also refuse to succumb to Arab resistance - have decided
to builds houses in Judea and Samaria, aka as the Westbank. Nowadays, as much as 400,000 Jews are living in the Palestinian territory, with no end in
The Palestinians, conversely, mostly split between the Islamist Hamas and the secular PA, have done very little to make the Israelis feel safe with
actual negotiations with them. This policy of "concession without promises", without renouncing certain views, without insuring the Israelis that
they have nothing to fear, has done nothing but encourage the policies taken by the Israeli government.
So the world, the bystanders, have to ask themselves a question. What is fair? What is important and relevant? In terms of fairness, I find it hard to
not see that the Arabs have not done their part to make Israel feel that they shouldn't worry that their concessions, as earlier concessions have
indicated, will not be used as opportunities towards an ulterior policy of "destruction by stages".
If what matters to you is not the basic morality we expect as individuals - and so expect a similar policy as nations - but rather, the primacy of
self interest and self interest alone, than political realists will balk at the idea that we should sacrifice our national interests for the sake of
the Jews. This school of thought has plenty of it's proponents, even though, since this idea is so blunt, it can't be stated so literally, but must
be hidden under a cover of political correctness i.e. emphasizing some evil of the Israelis in excess of what fairness justifies.
This is the status quo as I see it.