Through the narratives of Zionism and Arab nationalism in Palestine, it is implicit that there are many differences and fewer commonalities between the two. First and foremost, in comprehending the term ‘Arab nationalism in Palestine’, determining the point at which Palestinian national consciousness developed is crucial. Charles Smith argues that a general awareness of Palestine as an area distinct from Greater Syria had already existed, as reflected in the Ottoman government’s use of the term “land of Palestine” . This essay shall argue that the number of differences between the nationalisms outweigh the commonalities pre-1948. Such commonalities include their parallel expressions of cultural nationalism rather than religious nationalism, …show more content…
Although traditional Jews viewed their return to the land of Zion, Israel, as a decision to be determined by God, Oz Almog in his book The Sabra evaluates the ‘“link between religion and nation in Judaism” which he claims “strengthened the para-religious dimensions of Zionism”. As a result of their treatment in the past, they were more able to detach themselves from traditions which conflicted with modern civilization and were able to redesign what it meant to be Jewish. Charles Liebman further argues that the Zionist revolution created a sort of civil religion in Palestine, which later fuelled it to become “activist and predominantly secular.” Likewise, Arab nationalism in Palestine cannot be categorised as a nationalism based solely on religious beliefs, largely because it was not observed by one religion alone and was composed of both Muslims and Christians proponents. In fact, in the latter half of the nineteenth century, sixteen percent of the Arab population in Palestine was Christian. Charles Smith explicates that the Christians were aware of themselves living in a specific region called Palestine, and it is “among them that there emerges the dominant journalistic opposition to Zionism.” Thus, one can assume that both nationalisms were not in dispute for …show more content…
Unequivocally, Zionism received de facto support from foreign powers which Palestinian nationalism did not. Two key examples of this are the Balfour Declaration and creation of the British Mandate. Zionists were able to gain sympathy, and in turn, support from prominent figures who influenced the making of decisions such as the Balfour Declaration . The Declaration failed to regard the indigenous Arabs of Palestine, who comprised ninety percent of Palestine’s population, specifying them as “non-Jewish community,” and whilst it acknowledged their “civil and religious rights”, it was silent in respect to their political rights . In contrast, it overtly referred to a “national home for the Jews” and their “political status.” Likewise, the American administration already displayed support for the Balfour Declaration, later endorsing an essentially similar document in 1922. Thus, it is explicit from the Balfour Declaration that Zionism possessed immense international support. In contrast, the aspirations of Palestinian Arabs had not been incorporated in a decision that would have a similar impact. When Palestinians politicians like Izzat Darwaza attempted to create a union within Greater Syria, it was dismissed as Syria and Lebanon fell under French dominance, thus isolating Palestinian nationalism from similar independent movements in close vicinity.
Stephen Eric Bronner analyzes how the Jewish Zionist movement shape the Protocols and reflect the ideologies that are challenged between the two during the rise of the anti-Semite movement. He argues the ideas in this pamphlet are a complete forgery, yet they “helped shape the mass movements, revolutions, and wars of the twentieth century.” (4) Chapter three of his book, Rumor About the Jews, attempts to explain the effort the Protocols make against the modernity linked to political anti-Semitism supposedly taking place at the hands of Jews and their reactions to it. Antisemitic ideology, Bronner states, in contrast to the Judeophobia of earlier times, “presupposed a denial of the Jew both as a person and as a Jew.” (59)
In 1917, the British defeated the Ottomans and occupied Palestine . This promise was later incorporated into the mandate that was granted to Britain by the League of nations in 1922. During their mandate from 1922 to 1948, the British found that their contradictory promises to Jews and Palestinian Arabs were difficult to reconcile. The Zionists envisioned opening emigration on a large-scale and some spoke of a Jewish state encompassing all Palestine.
A long time ago, people who were Jewish had to face a crucial discrimination ever since others blamed them for killing Jesus. Nobody exactly knows what the truth was but believes in religion books where the elders’ deformed words of Judaism were recorded. Based on the “Sister Rose’s Passion” documentary, Rose Thering — a Roman Catholic Dominican Religious Sister — questioned this false belief towards the Jewish people and dreamed of a world without religious prejudice, wishing teachers to educate their students to make her dream a reality. No one, especially including the Jews, should be raced or hurt by any opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. Throughout the movie, Sister Rose encourages everyone to “Be an Upstander, Not a Bystander” for the Jews.
This powerful text, “When Religion Becomes Lethal: The Explosive Mix of Politics and Religion in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam” is the centerpiece for understanding the truth behind centuries of spiritual history and politics between three different denominations. Dr. Charles Kimball focuses solely on identifying the negatives within politics and religion as a whole, and how unconstructive the two can actually be. Kimball gave a huge amount of historical insight on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and how each of the religions came about. He also discusses their different relationships and different viewpoints that they have for one another. Lastly, Kimball uses his years of experience to offer a new and much broader way to think about
Throughout the Nazi regime in Europe from 1943 to 1945, many Jews opposed Hitler’s policies by engaging in acts of physical, mental and spiritual resistance. Many non-Jews also stood by the Jews in opposing Hitler’s government and his policies. These people helped many Jews escape ghettos and concentration camps. However, there were also many Jewish people who did not resist the Nazi’s and fell victim to their rule. Many non-Jews did not help the Jewish people and simply followed the regime by ignoring the atrocities that the Jews faced throughout the Nazi regime.
This can be anything from flying out politicians to Israel, using their own members to contact politicians who have similar interests as them, and even mentoring students at their local student government. All of this to muster up pro Israeli sentiments from the current politicians as well as the future generation. These techniques work so effectively according to polling 46 percent of Americans are more sympathetic to Israel whereas only 12 percent did for Arabs. This statistic is a key reason as to why Americans recognize Israel as a state instead of Palestine. The A.I.P.A.C is instrumental to the amount of military aid Israel gets.
The two sources being used in this paper is FDR and the Jews by Breitman, Richard, and Allan J. Lichtman (2013) and Saving the Jews: Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Holocaust by Robert N. Rosen (2006). The Origin of the first source is a book written By Richard Breitman
Something must be done about their situation. Both the Jewish people and the Palestinian people have lost too many sons and daughters and have shed too much blood”(144). The Jews often got frustrated at themselves and other people. Jews found themselves hopeless around the clock in the concentration camps. Hopelessness ia very troubling thing to have.
I had familiarized myself with the history of the question of a Jewish homeland and the position of the British and the Arabs. I was skeptical, as I read over the whole record up to date, about some of the views and attitudes assumed by the “striped-pants boys” - the State Department (Truman, 1965). Clearly he did not agree with what his administration wanted to do. Truman would have been happy if the UN would solve the conflict, but that was not tangible. The UN was newly formed, but more importantly, no significant proposal could get past the General Assembly or the Security Council with American support.
Sarna and Johnathon Golden in their article “The American Jewish Experience in the Twentieth Century: Antisemitism and Assimilation”, inform readers on a very wide spectrum of how Jews are viewed throughout the world during this time period. The authors write, “About half of the country 's Jews lived in New York City alone, making it the world 's most populous Jewish community by far”(Sarna, Golden), this connects to my book directly because it has the same exact setting which helps me analyze the book further. The authors inform readers about anti semitism and assimilation during the twentieth century in order to give people an idea about how these people were treated and help readers see the world through their eyes. The intended audience of this piece is people interested in the Jewish culture and are interested in how they are viewed and treated worldwide. This article directly relates to my GRQ because it focuses exactly on some of the key points that I wanted to learn about.
In the 1920’s and 1930’s, Jews in America, a minority, suffered much anti-semitism. Anti-semitism is defined as the prejudicism,
Many Germans, during WWII had started to take on the ideology of Hitler – that Jewish citizens in Germany were the cause of their poverty and misfortune. Of course, many knew that this was merely a form of scapegoating, and although they disagreed with the majority of Germany’s citizens, many would not speak up for fear of isolation (Boone,
A particular moment in British imperial history that historians have challenged and have yet to understand the true motives behind its creation is the Balfour Declaration in 1917. The 67-character, single paged declaration addressed to Lord Rothschild from Arthur Balfour, presents yet another moment in British history, that is highly controversial and displays the complexities and consequences of empire. Historians have argued that the declaration had been established due to hard headed realism in the sense that both the British and Jewish interests were identical, some have argued that it was due to Christian, Zionist and anti-Semitic individuals like Lloyd George, the Anglican support of the Jewish community, and due to rise of Zionist lobbying
And Palestine must become a Jewish homeland! We have suffered enough!” pg.197 As a Zionist, he believes that one must fill their life with meaning and make a difference in the world. This is his view of living as a Jew. Despite being chosen, he decides how he will choose to live with what's chosen for him.
Truman’s role in the decision to recognise Israel has persuaded others that he is best viewed as a villain because he really did this as a political ploy to secure Jewish votes in a Presidential election. Following the aftermath of WW2 and the holocaust, many people sympathised with Jewish people and the horrors they faced, one of these people supposedly being Harry Truman, making his opinions known through the support of the creation of Israel and the recognition of it,