Posts

What We Talk About When We Talk About Palestine

By Kim Chernin / September 14, 2009

Kim Chernin is the author of Everywhere a Guest, Nowhere at Home: A New Vision of Israel and Palestine. She is guest-blogging this week on Jewcy, and this is her first post.

I am worried about us, the whole community of us, American Jews who have lost the ability to hold a reasonable discussion. I became aware of this as I was writing a book about Israel and Palestine. I had published many books before so it is customary, when I run into old friends or acquaintances, to be asked what I’m working on. In the past, people didn’t seem particularly impressed or interested; I guess the question was mainly polite and I learned not to answer it in too much detail.

But with this book, everything was different. The responses were often explosive and urgent, sometimes immediately embattled. I remember a few of them. "Why Palestine? Are you one of those self-hating Jews? What do you have to say that hasn’t been said a hundred times already? We really need another book about Israel? I sure hope you’re not going to attack Israel." Those were the negative responses from people who were not friends but belonged to a larger circle of acquaintances. It wasn’t clear to me why their response was hostile before I had a chance to describe the book or my intentions for it; perhaps the word Palestine in the title sounded suspicious, as if anyone writing about both Israel and Palestine was probably not going to take Israel’s side?

The positive responses sounded something like this: "Good for you. Oh, are you courageous. That’s the most important topic in the world right now. Oh boy are you going to run into some angry people. I hope you’re ready for a strong response." The neutral responses were few and far between. "What’s your point of view? I’ll be interested to find out what you are thinking." I explained, when given a chance, that my point of view was evolving; that the book was difficult to write, especially for a woman who had been a Zionist since she was a little girl, when the State of Israel was established in 1948.

Most of the discoveries I was making while doing research were about my own ignorance. I had lived in Israel for a time, I had strong opinions about Israel, but once I started to read it was clear to me how little I knew. I had a couple of basic misconceptions. I thought the Israeli army was fundamentally different than any army in the world. I took seriously that it practiced a "purity of arms." My boyfriend, when I lived in Israel, was a student at the Technion. He was studying to be an engineer but he loved poetry and was becoming interested in the Kabbalah. When he came to stay at our Kibbutz as the commander of an armed border patrol he had hair down to his shoulders, played chess in the Moadon after dinner, and was always engaged in serious discussions with members of the Kibbutz. For me, and for everyone else who met him, he embodied the idealism we wanted to associate with the Israeli army. In fact, for a long time, my entire impression of the Israeli army was based on him, and on an article I had read that Israeli soldiers cried at the funerals of their comrades and that the army higher command was debating whether this was an appropriate behavior for a soldier. Long-haired soldiers who read poetry and weep at funerals: that seemed at the time sufficient knowledge on which to base my strong opinions about Israel’s fighting men.

But my reading and research were opening up other views of the Israeli army, a ferocious fighting force, the fourth largest army in the world. Israel, my little-sister country, had nuclear weapons and the largest army in the Middle East. Did that mean that Israel was perhaps less endangered than I had thought?

My other misconception concerned the Palestinians: I had thought that all of them were terrorists.

These are pretty slim qualifications for writing a book, I admit. But in their own way this these misconceptions became interesting AS the subject of a book written by a hot-headed, opinionated, ignorant author. All I had to do was turn the focus on myself, to wonder how I’d come to hold such strong opinions in the face of such blatant ignorance and to wonder whether other Jews who also were constantly getting into heated arguments about Israel might have arrived at their condition in the same way that I had. I put a lot of facts and statistics and quotations and stories and anecdotes in my book but the book remained essentially a narrative of consciousness-how it shaped itself through what it was willing to include and what it forcefully and militantly kept out of itself.

It’s funny to think that one could be inspired to write a book because of one’s misconceptions. But here we are.

POST A COMMENT

  • By Disco_Stu 9/22/09 at 3:09 a.m. UTC

    Robin, what a lame post. What were you thinking?

    First you state how glad you are that Kim Chernin wrote a book about this subject, then you castigate everyone who bothered to respond on topic. 

     I don’t get it. Why does Kim get praise for writing the book whereas those who attempt to add value and context to the discussion get a finger wag and a lecture?

    I’m well aware of the haredi/secular divide in Israel. Kim Chernin didn’t mention it anywhere in her post though, did she? (For the record, I did bring up the haredi/secular issue when I wrote this: "Unfortunately while ‘recovering Zionists’ are dancing in peace parades and boycotting couscous, actual Israeli moderates are trying to eke out an existence between an intractable ethnic conflict in the most tribally stubborn part of the world and a formidable movement of Jewish fundamentalists who respect not the notions of democracy and western liberalism.")

    For some reason you’ve decided that providing context (you know, bringing up the 70s, 80s, and 90s) to this argument is doing the world a disservice.

     

  • Robin Margolis
    By Robin Margolis 9/21/09 at 6:51 a.m. UTC

    Dear Friends:

    I am glad that Kim Chernin has written another book, especially on this subject, and I hope that Jewcy will do a book review of it. I am sure that it will be good, as I have read other things she has written.

    Now, I am puzzled by the other commenters on her essay. They keep talking about Israel as it was in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s.

    They appear to assume that trends in the past will persist into the future – that the Israeli seculars will remain dominant; that Israel will remain more powerful than the Palestinians; and that the Jews will remain a majority within Israel.

    As someone who reads the Israeli newspapers on a regular basis — they are available free of charge, in English, online — I would submit that the preceeding commenters are not taking into account several demographic facts:

    1. One-third of all Israeli kindergartners are now Haredi Orthodox.

    2. Haredi Orthodox children constitute an estimated 25% of all Israeli first graders.

    3. Forty-eight percent of all children in Israel’s school system are currently in Haredi Orthodox schools or Arab schools.

    That means in fifteen years, one-third of all Israeli eighteen year olds will be the black coat Haredi Orthodox, a group that is pious and Jewishly learned, but vehemently opposed to democracy.

    They do not serve in the IDF — they live in poverty on stipends from the state and study Talmud, as their schools teach very little English, science, math or computers — their overworked wives bring home small salaries — they have at least six children per family — many of them are strongly opposed to democracy and pluralism, regarding it as against Jewish law –

    Now, imagine that they are one-third of all Israeli Jews.

    So what will happen to Israel? The Haredim have already made up their minds what will happen and discuss this freely in Israeli newspapers. They plan, as soon as they get enough votes, to make Orthodox law, the halacha, the law of Israel, just as sharia, the religious law of Islam, is the law in some Arab countries.

    They make no secret of their plans.

    They plan to turn Israel into what I call a "Halachic Republic of Israel" — just like the Islamic Republic of Iran. Israel will not be a democracy any more.

    And will the Israeli Arabs — who will be very large in number by that time — stand by while the Haredim take over the country? They can’t afford to, as a "Halachic Republic of Israel" will not be friendly to them, to put it mildly.

    A civil war will break out, in which the Israeli Arabs will be assisted by the very numerous Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza. Israel will be torn to pieces.

    I believe that we cannot spend our time discussing which peace effort failed between 1970 and 1990. That is the distant past.

    We must be realistic and deal with the Israel that is coming.

    Sincerely,

    Robin Margolis

Wanna post your own comments?