How Zionism helped the Nazis perpetrate the HolocaustComments
kano OP wrote
Zionism is at its heart a racially exclusive ideology for the promotion of white supremacy
I think the argument made regarding this could also be made about the USA, but no one would agree that the USA isn't promoting white supremacy. And when it comes to non white Jews, Israel doesn't necessarily let them all in willingly or at all. And given that the zionist project was started by white European Jews, I'm also quite happy to see Zionism as a project of European settler colonialism at the end of the day. Especially when you pay attention to which countries are really supporting Israel.
DK what flag you are referring to.
And I mean I found the article interesting because I have also read about David Ben Gurion talking about which refugees he wanted to allow to come to Israel and which not, and he also makes it clear that the Zionists were really interested in fit young people who could help build Israel and not necessarily all the old or super young, or unhealtby Jewish refugees in Europe
cyb3rd4ndy wrote
First of all, "White" and "European" are not the same thing. The concept of "Whiteness" doesn't just mean that someone has light skin and that they have some ethnic heritage from Europe. This is fundamental to understanding what makes "whiteness" part of a greater division of identity between white and black, and/or white and other people of color. Jews have a complicated relationship with Whiteness, but it's a super big stretch to go from "Zionists were Jews from Europe" to "Zionists were White Supremacist". Yes, Zionists ascribed to a racial notion of Jewishness, but that isn't "Whiteness". Yes, Zionists have also had racist views towards non-European Jews, but that still isn't "White Supremacy".
kano OP wrote
to be honest, there's so much relationships and collaborations and similarities and parallels between the white supremacists and zionists that its hard for me to take this comment seriously.
Even Theodor Herzl was talking about bringin European values to the 'savages' or 'barbarians' or whatever during the height of European Imperialism. If that's not white supremacy then idk what is.
cyb3rd4ndy wrote (edited )
You should take it seriously because reducing Zionism to White Supremacy erases what is specific about White Supremacy and Zionism. Besides that, it isn't just Europeans or White nationalists that adopt supremacist ideologies, so similarities and parallels between White Nationalists, Zionists, and European colonizers are also shared by other nationalists that aren't White, nor European. Do you think there is something special about the elitism of Zionist, White, or European nationalists? Have you seen the way other nationalists talk about indigenous tribes in the regions they claim are theirs?
Also, just to complicate this more, a lot of American-German Jews had a supremacist attitude towards migrant Russian Jews. Both European, both with white skin. They considered the Russian Jewish immigrants to be "ghetto Jews" with uncivilized characteristics.
What is the point of comparing Zionists with White Supremacists? As opposed to any other sort of nationalist? Why is that a useful rhetorical point? Why is it useful to emphasize Jewish "whiteness" when it comes to Zionism? If you argue that Zionist Jews are White because they come from Europe, doesn't that logic apply to non-Zionist Jews? And if you make that case, then you are basically calling all Ashkenazim "white", which I find super problematic, considering how that category of whiteness has been often built against Jews.
kin wrote (edited )
Edit: maybe my point is that even in Israel, there are cases for racial discrimination and colorism if you consider that Mizrahi Jews are discriminate against and Ethiopian Jews are troublesome migrants even if they are Jews. Imo there are lots of overlapping in Zionism and whiteness, but again I am not making a claim that Zionism is white supremacy. And even in Europe you can see an hierarchy in the popular consciousness about who are more white, and usually the more North you go more white you are.
cyb3rd4ndy wrote (edited )
Mizrahi, Ethiopian, and other Jews of Color are also Zionists!
It’s not like the Ashkenazim tricked the rest of the Jews into Zionism.
From this article: https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/325768/how-anti-zionists-manipulate-mizrahi-narratives/
“The mainstream Mizrahi perspective is a Zionist one. It is true that, as with any community, Mizrahim are not a monolith — but as Hen Mazzig writes in his article for JNS, “Mizrahi activism is not exclusively a pro-Israel movement, but it acknowledges that the safety of the majority of Mizrahi Jews is reliant on the existence of the Jewish state where we found refuge.” Today, Mizrahim make up 45% of Israel’s population, making us the largest Jewish group in the country over Ashkenazim, who make up 32%. Much of Mizrahi culture has become synonymous with Israeli culture at large — from listening to Eyal Golan to eating sabich on Shabbat. To imply that 45% of Israel’s population is rooting for its destruction is an unbelievable falsity.”
I assume you’re aware that colorism exists in non-White and non-European contexts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_based_on_skin_color
In general, I think we should be careful not to project social constructs developed and maintained in one place onto other places. Whiteness is one of those constructs. Whiteness does include color as part of its criteria, but it is so much more than that. Even in Europe, whiteness isn’t as primary as it is in the United States.
kin wrote
I am aware of all that, that's why theres still migrants from Africa and middle east to Palestine/Israel.
And yes colorism is somewhat widespread and I suspect is very much linked with colonialism. And if you want to complicate things we can discuss ( not really) the Han "supremacy" in china.
Like I said to 🖤 🦡 (black badger), I guess we are splitting a hair here. Maybe there is some mistakes in the arguments but at the end of the day the task is simple despite of the complicate the situation is.
cyb3rd4ndy wrote (edited )
What do you mean the task is simple?
It isn't simple for me!
I'm a Jew that lives in the United States, the 2nd largest population of Jews in the world after Israel. The United States is absolutely a colonial state, based on white supremacy, that still persecutes the remaining indigenous population. I also live in Arizona, where a lot of that persecution happens. One of the things that makes it easier to be an anarchist here is that there is a sizable indigenous anarchist community. I don't know what Palestinian anarchists there are and I have asked numerous people.
Anyway, if I want to "decolonize" then what exactly does that look like? What would be the basis of my non-colonial existence if it isn't in Israel? See the problem? It isn't splitting hairs to argue about whether or not Jews are colonizers of Palestine, are white, etc. It's fundamental to how we think about who has a claim to live in a region and what way of living there is right.
kin wrote
Anarchy is simple in theory, is just get rid of state and any oppression, hierarchy or any other hidrance in the path for freedom.
I said the other day, I don't think overcomplicating anarchism is valuable. Overanalyzing or going too phylosophical {or metaphysical} at the end is just serving for the individual engaging in it. We® said many times, we don't have a political program, we don't have demands, no political parties or unions, no flags no colors (...) etc
Maybe, if we want to engage in the building side we sure need to go deep in the analysis, but then just if you believe it's possible
kin wrote
Sorry, I don't want or wanted to make this a personal issue.
I think we (or I for that matter) mixed a couple of questions here. My knowledge is totally disconnected of the issue as many are. I wonder 8f we have any Israelis here tho. I don't want you to feel unheard or unpreciatted here, my main point is just to make clear that I find Zionism to be a very fucked up ideology, not historicallly but currently in the affairs today. If I was more willing to go to the bottom of this I would have engaged in a better debate here. In the other hand I can't dismiss all the reports and accounts telling me what is happening in Israel bc of Zionism and their political stablisjment.
Other thing is that I don't think you are involved in Zionism or Israel policies just for being a Jewish american. (..) I think the Israelis do engage in colonialism but I am not sure to say that the whole migration happened like this. And I do think whiteness is something at play in Zionism (let's not forget that this is not limited to Israel or Jewish people, look the alt-right and many evangelical Christian in whole world)
I will leave this here bc I was starting to use liberal talking points. But I think we started speaking from different places willing to reach a common point that I guess will not happening here/now.
cyb3rd4ndy wrote (edited )
Ok, thanks - but I'm using myself as an example for how this becomes complicated... not just to express that I have a personal stake in the matter.
As an anarchist, that is, someone with a complicated theory about why I want anarchy and how to achieve anarchy, I'm opposed to all forms of nationalism. That includes the nationalism that created the United States, the nationalism that created the State of Israel, etc. but it also includes the other nationalisms in the Middle-East and Islamism. So as an anarchist, Jewish or not, that means I don't give nationalism a free pass just because it is the nationalism of an oppressed group of people. Palestinian nationalism doesn't get a free pass. Nor does Islamist nationalism. Not Zionism, not ISIS, not Fatah, not the PLO, not Hamas. So who exactly, as an anarchist, am I in solidarity with? Who am I an ally to, or an accomplice with? It isn't any generic ethnic, religious, racial, tribal, or national group. It is with others who are anarchists or at least whose goals aren't fundamentally against my own goals.
Now, as someone against colonization, that also means I aim at some kind of decolonization. That seems to be the logical conclusion. But what does decolonization look like if you are a diaspora Jew? Well, if the Left, anti-Zionists, etc. start calling you "white" and they deny that you are actually from a people indigenous to the place you're from, then what are you left to do? There is some ways that Jews have become white, but the way that this is used in anti-Zionist discourse is to deny that Ashkenazim are also indigenous to Palestine/Eretz Yisrael. Accepting the status of whiteness in the United States and in some European countries, to whatever extent that has happened, doesn't disqualify Jews from their claim to descend from people in Israel. So anyway, it's a real question what relationship with colonization is. Are American Jews participating in settler-colonialism more than Israeli Jews? That's the question. American Jews have no claim to indigenous ancestry in America, but they do in Israel. That's a big problem for how this discourse is framed. If Jews in America are participating in colonization more than Jews in Israel are, then a big piece of the story is missing from the anti-Zionist discourse.
I also think that anarchists in the United States should be paying at least as much attention to what the United States is doing to indigenous people here as it does to what Israel does to Palestinians. Here is one place news can be found about that:
https://www.indigenousaction.org/news/
So oddly enough, as an anarchist this is less infuriating for me than it would be if like most people in the entire world, I was a nationalist. Then I'd have to get into even more weeds when it comes to Israel policy, I'd have to look at international law, I'd have to compare Israel with other nation-states and their practices of colonization/ethnic cleansing/assimilation/etc.
I think that as anarchists, our fundamentals should apply to the United States, to Israel and Palestine, and to other places. Two especially relevant and related situations are Russian and Ukraine, and Turkey, Syria, Rojava. Anarchists should be able to take coherent positions related to all of these situations. Example...
This logic should also apply to Zionism, to Islamism, to Palestinian nationalism.
It should also reflect our solidarity with Rojava against Turkey, against ISIS, and against other nationalists opposed to Rojava.
[deleted] wrote
kin wrote
I want to add something to this convo later, but at this point I am not sure if it makes sense... A lot to untangle..
black_badger wrote
Why not try a complete sentence?
kin wrote
I won't claim that Zionism is white supremacy, but I think it's very Fascist in its current form.
And I make a strong point that whiteness and Europe is very linked. For me whiteness have a strong colonial component
kano OP wrote
Yea for me at least it's about the whole colonial thing and the historical context of when Zionism got going that makes me kind of satisfied with leaving Zionism as white supremacy. The Zionists have been portraying themselves as defenders of the west for a long time, and also started their colonial ventures during the height of European colonialism in general, and there's plenty of Zionists who ain't Jews anyway.
But I don't really wanna say anything else here, don't really need to convince the people of anything, just hope they also agree that Zionism is a settler colonial venture.
cyb3rd4ndy wrote (edited )
Replying to both monday and kano:
Here's where I am getting lost with you two... you want to make this about "whiteness" and it just isn't. I don't have any idea if you have studied nationalism in non-European contexts, or colonization that isn't European, but your insistence on comparing Jewish nationalism (Zionism) with White Supremacy makes it seem like you are using the well-established leftwing opposition to White Supremacy and (European) Colonialism as a springboard for opposition to Zionism. I think that this is totally unnessaccary and that we can oppose Zionism as it is.
As far as Zionism and colonization goes, what exactly is your take here? Do you think Jews are indigenous to Palestine? No? If they are, then how do you sort out what parts of Jewish migration to Palestine are colonial and how much of it isn't? Were all the Jews who have migrated to Palestine Zionists (White Supremacists)? Is it only the Ashkenazim? Is it only some parts of Palestine? What parts? And what about the British and their mandate? They're classic colonizers. Were they Zionists? What about the U.N. and their partition plan... Zionists? White Supremacists? What about the Ottomans... colonizers? How exactly did people in Palestine become Muslim? ETC.
Here's my take:
Empires used to rule the world. Not only in Europe, but all over the place. Over the past few hundred years, those empires broke up and what emerged in their place were nation states. That is... different nationalists claimed that they were the nationality that had the right to govern a territory and form a state. That's all of the nationalists. Not just the British ones, or the Irish ones, or the Italian ones, or the Polish ones, or the German ones, or the Jewish ones; but also nationalists in India, in Africa, in Asia, in the Americas, etc. A lot of what you're talking about regarding supremacy is part of nationalism itself, before it ever becomes colonial or fascist.
When it comes to colonization... of course the old empires colonized huge parts of the globe before any nation-states did. But yes, some of the many nation-states that formed also colonized. Yes, Zionism comes out of this period. However, the logic of Zionism wasn't colonial. I know that they literally used the terms colony and colonize, but actual colonial enterprises aren't based on the notion of a people indigenous to a region returning to it. Zionism was based on Jews believing that their fundamental problem for 2,000 years was that they were a nationality in diaspora and that created numerous problems they could only solve by returning to their homeland and restoring their sovereignty in that land. That would have been their mission whether or not anyone else was living there, whether or not the people living there were white or black or brown. They didn't go there to exploit the labor or resources of the Palestinian population that lived there. They didn't create an outpost for European nations to extract resources. It's just not the same logic.
So how can you compare that with White Nationalists? What is specifically "white" about this at all? I can't help but think the entire point of adding "white" into this is to make the claim that Ashkenazim are white and hence, have no claim to indigeneity in Palestine. If that's the point you're making then just fucking say it.
Also, also - specifying "white" supremacy or nationalism makes it seem like you're making an apology for plain, normal nationalism. Like there is a good kind of nationalism that isn't separatist, supremacist, authoritarian. Is that the case? Do you support Arab Nationalism? Pan-Arab Nationalism? Palestinian Nationalism? Are those the good guys? Is that why Zionism needs to be "white" so that it can be a bad nationalism? Can't we, anarchists, make the straight-froward argument that we're opposed to nationalism generally, which includes all of the above: white, black, Jewish, Arab, etc.? Or do we need to play this game with the fucking bourgeoisie and pretend like we support the good nationalisms, the kind that create good socialist dictatorships and they support the bad nationalisms, the kind that create capitalist states? Are we really going to go back to the third-worldist, Maoist bullshit? In the age of the failed Arab Spring and Islamism, are we going to really pretend that nationalism is only bad if it's white, European? As if national liberation doesn't become national supremacy?
black_badger wrote
pathetic. every single nationalist movement has a fucked up history. but if we want to engage in the Holocaust-complicity Olympics we can start with the Ford Motor Company and IBM, swing over to the US State Department, then zip over to the discuss the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (and the previous Treaty of Rapallo that fed Soviet fuel to the Reich, facilitating the rearming of the Wehrmacht). Let's not forget the bulk of Arab nationalist movements allied with the Reich because of their shared anti-British/anti-(free) French policies. The effects of the mainstream Zionists on the perpetration of the Holocaust was infinitesimal compared to the actions of actual criminals.
kano OP wrote (edited )
Well if I was studying holocaust complicity politics specifically, then I would discuss that stuff, Also makes sense to me that a group being colonised by a certain group of Europeans might then Allie with an enemy of that group
But if I was studying Zionism I would maybe then find this topic a useful or interesting one, especially since the Zionists really exploit the Holocaust to justify the occupation of Palestine.
black_badger wrote
"Zionists really exploit the Holocaust to justify the occupation of Palestine"
this is true from the time of the declaration of the State of Israel, but has nothing to do with policies of the Jewish Agency or the other political zionist organizations during WWII.
kano OP wrote (edited )
Not exactly sure what you mean here, it's not true that the rise to power of the Nazis in Germany and the Holocaust didn't have anything to do with policies (or view points of people in) of the Jewish Agency during ww2. And I think that when talking about how Zionist exploitation of the Holocaust, it is of course completely relevant to talk about what they were saying and doing when it was happening.
Can give some quotes from another essay I seen about this too if you are interested.
Edit: I guess what I'm trying to say is that Zionists now engage in some historical revisionism with regard to the Holocaust, to help justify the zionist project in palestine, so going over affinities and collaborations etween Zionism and European fascism during the time of the Holocaust are relevant and of interest.
black_badger wrote
Sure I'm interested. But the issue isn't what the Jewish Agency was doing in Palestine during WWII; the link states that "the Zionists" helped "perpetrate the Holocaust," which is on a totally different level of political action.
kano OP wrote
The link says "Zionism" and not "the Zionists" unless am really missing something. Anyway dk if you read the article or not, but examples are being given there. Here's some quotes from Jewish Agency people during the time of Nazi Germany. Found these all in Palestine - A Socialist Introduction
“There is something positive in their tragedy and that is that Hitler oppressed them as a race and not as a religion. Had he done the latter, half the Jews in Germany would simply have converted to Christianity.”
Menacem Ussishkin president of the Jewish National Fund
Whom to save: Should we help everyone in need, without regard to the quality of the people? Should we not give this activity a Zionist national character and try foremost to save those who can be of use to the Land of Israel and to Jewry? I understand that it seems cruel to put the question in this form, but unfortunately we must state that if we are able to save only 10,000 people from among 50,000 who can contribute to build the country … as against saving a million Jews who will be a burden, or at best an apathetic element, we must restrain ourselves and save the 10,000 that can be saved from among the 50,000—despite the accusations and pleas of a million.
1943 private memo of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish National Agency
“It is the job of Zionism not to save the remnant of Israel in Europe but rather to save the land of Israel for the Jewish people and the Yishuv.”
David Ben Gurion
The hopes of Europe’s six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked: “Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?” I replied “No.”… From the depths of the tragedy I want to save … young people [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world…. Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it
Chaim Weizmann
Toward the end of the war a staunch anti-Zionist, Rabbi Dov Michael Weissmandel, met with high-level Nazi officials to make a desperate deal. The Nazis knew they were losing the war and needed cash. They told Weismandel that the remaining Jews could buy their freedom for a large sum of money. The Nazis gave Weissmandel a deadline to come up with that money. Weissmandel flooded the Zionist organizations with his pleas, but they chose to do nothing. The deadline passed. In an agonizing letter to the Jewish Agency, Weissmandel wrote:
Why have you done nothing until now? Who is guilty of this frightful negligence? Are you not guilty, our Jewish brothers: you who have the greatest good fortune in the world—liberty? … Twelve thousand Jews—men, women, and children, old men, infants, healthy and sick ones, are to be suffocated daily…. Their destroyed hearts cry out to you for help as they bewail your cruelty.40
And the whole thing with Rudolph Kastner is gone over in the article, so I ain't gonna go over it again here.
to be clear I'm just trying to show here that the policies of the Jewish Agency were not completely unrelated to the Holocaust.
black_badger wrote
What these citations show is the realpolitik of rescue and immigration, not "helping" to "perpetuate the Holocaust." Plus the context of the British Mandate -- the actual location for immigration policy -- is missing from the discussion; even if the Jewish Agency had wanted to bring rescued European Jews to Palestine, they'd have had to defy their wartime alliance with the Brits (as they did after the war). All of these debates and gotchas are pointless.
What all zionists militias (from left to right) did from November 1947 through the final ceasefire in 1949 (and the military ever since) -- killing civilians, destroying homes, mass expulsions -- is horrible enough without (falsely) making them complicit in "perpetuating the Holocaust."
kin wrote
Fuck Zionism, I won't try to wash what they became and how there was collaborators in their ranks.
Zionism has nothing to do with being Jewish or having Jewish heritages.. some folks are tripping in the comments
black_badger wrote
seriously, monday, i want to know if you have Jewish ancestry. you've brought up an important point, but it's difficult to respond to you if there's no context. thanks.
kin wrote
Not sure why tho.. I have a hard time to accepting any attempt to wash Zionism actions.. if there was sections of Zionism that collaborated I don't care really bc it's not a surprise to me. And I sure don't think Zionism is just another nationalism movement.
If something, anarchism prescribes destruction of all these structures, not sure why we are trying to split a hair here if we are defendind somewhat the same position
black_badger wrote
I'm curious to know why/how you think zionism isn't just another nationalist movement.
kin wrote
Because for me Zionism took extra steps in delving into a proto fascistic ideology.. and we just happen to be more vocal about it bc of all the sentiment in the left for this left Zionism that was socialist, bundist, the kibbutzim and all..
I don't know but I don't think there's anything salvageable about zionism
black_badger wrote
What are those "extra steps"? When did they start? Who started them? What is "proto-fascism" and how does it differ from actual fascism? What's your understanding of fascism (characteristics and/or definitions)? Are there other nationalist movements that definitely do not share these "proto-fascist" characteristics? Are there any that do? You're merely throwing around typical leftist swear words without substance.
kano OP wrote (edited )
some folks are tripping in the comments
Yea they are but honestly this was less controversial then I thought it would be.
black_badger wrote
Are you Jewish?
kin wrote
No, myother is not Jewish neither Iam circumcised.. bit I probably have enough Jewish blood to ask for a conversion
black_badger wrote
There's no such thing as "Jewish blood."
Okay, so my objection to your post regarding the relationship of Judaism to zionism is that you're speaking for Jews and Judaism without having the personal experience of being Jewish. That's what some call "goysplaining" and it's authoritarian, because you don't actually know what the relationship is or could/should be. Rather, you've decided what's true for others.
kin wrote
I knew you would go down this road..
I am not a Jew but I am not a goy either, are you familiar with anusim? And you are saying that Jewishness is not based on heritage?
I am sorry if you felt attacked, but you're mixing things, nobody talked about Jewish people or Jewish religion.. the topic was Zionism and it's a fucking fascist ideology nowadays so you can try pull this "goysplaining" that's just another way to weaponize identity to uncover whiteness or colonialism in Palestine
Lettuce wrote (edited )
It's really annoying how identity politics assumes and promotes that X identity group just has correct ideas. Which is just not fundementalky correct. So it reinforces harsh categories which uphold ad bigotry and reinforce a culture of bad security culture cuz u have to reveal ur relation to all identity group.
Which debates arround sex work requiring the oppressed group to snitch on themself to be taken seriously.
I don't have a take on this I was just replying to voice how the replies to u have annoyed me.
Edit: plenty of people in X identity group have good opininns and have unique perspectives which is important to listen to. But being part of a group matters quite little in if ur opinion is correct.
kin wrote (edited )
I guess they were debating in good faith here. But the issue is avoiding antisemitism when criticizing Zionism, and I think we avoided it. The other thing is limiting the debate around Jewish people/Israelis and Palestinian people. This issue with Zionism and the State of Israel is no longer a matter of perspectives but an nefarious ideology damaging people.
And do really think that we need to allow the voices that are involved in the matter speak and make an effort to allow these voices to be heard, but I don't think this is the issue here. Not sure if it makes sense
And yeah for opsec this kind of talks are a threat for anonymity. My luck that my opsec is already fucked, even if I kill this account and open other probably my writing style is already recognizable for someone willing to investigate it.
Lettuce wrote
Yeah I think they were being good faith.
black_badger wrote (edited )
If you're not Jewish, then by default you are a gentile (goy). Yes, I'm familiar with anusim. According to halakhah they (you?) are not Jewish, period. So when you said zionism has nothing to do with Judaism, you're goysplaining. I did mention that your point is interesting and definitely worth talking about (but certainly not in this particular context), but your authoritative decoupling of the two phenomena ignores two thousand years of Jewish disasporic history. Which you'd have more sense of if you were raised Jewish.
As for the silly statement that zionism is a form of white supremacy, I'll just point out that the majority of Israelis would never be considered white in a white supremacist context. Eurosupremacist for sure, but while that overlaps considerably with white supremacy, it's a distinct project.
TwentyFiveCharsOrLess wrote
In b4 some shitlib calls you a nazi
ArmyOfNone wrote (edited )
I dunno... Spiny subject, but the Mufti of Jerusalem has actively helped with the Holocaust in the Balkans and has called for the extermination of Jews in between meetings with Adolf. Also what is the flag of the Holy War Army?
Also...
Wtf if this statement? There's been people from several non-White backgrounds moving to Israel for decades...