> An opinion poll from January this year showed that only a yaw-dropping 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thought the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza. The option of not launching an operation at all was not even on the ballot.
I don't follow this war, or any war for that matter so I can't opine on this. However, I imagine that the chair of urban warfare studies with the Modern War Institute at West Point has the credentials to opine on this, and he agrees with the opinion of most Israelis. In fact, he states that the U.S. is causing great damage to Gaza by pressuring Israel to let up.
Remember, this poll was taken a while ago, in January, so today the opinion of many Israelis may be to the left of the chair of urban warfare studies with the Modern War Institute at West Point.
1) I understand why it makes sense looking from the outside to think of Israel as having two ethnicities, one secular and one Haredi—but still I think it's not right. I'm an American Jew and I've been living in Israel for more than a decade now. I meet a lot of people who used to be Haredi and are now secular, or who used to be secular and are now Haredi. I've even met people who have gone back and forth multiple times, or who have lived most of their lives somehow straddling that divide. The former Haredi, now secular types seem to have had a fairly easy time integrating into secular Israeli society and getting good jobs—I'm fully aware there is a lot that most Haredi schools don't teach in terms of science and math, but the graduates seem for the most part to have decent learning skills and work ethic. I don't think it's right to conceive of Haredi enclaves as being slums of an ethnic underclass, even if they are relatively poorer in statistical terms.
And I think there's a lot of dynamism within the Haredi world in terms of competing streams of thought—you have some groups that are going more closed-off over time while others grow more open, and a lot of people adjusting, moving their family from one Haredi sub-group to another that's a better fit. Keep in mind, this is a culture almost all informed observers wrote off for dead in the 1950s, arguing that this way of life couldn't survive modernity and the elimination of the small-town east European culture that it thrived in. Then there was big demographic growth and also a big return-to-religion movement in Israel in the 1970s and 1980s, and now there are signs that trend is reversing and there may be more people leaving the Haredi community than joining it. There's going to be a lot of social change ahead, neither I nor anyone else can predict how it turns out but current trends just continuing unchanged for decades ahead seems like the least likely scenario to me. My suspicion is that the Haredi community's continued growth will depend to a large extent on its ability to narrow at least somewhat the economic gap between their adherents and the general population—because otherwise the temptation for young people to leave the community will grow.
2) I also understand why the idea of Israel grabbing the West Bank to resolve demographic issues makes sense if you have a background in world history—but I think it's anachronistic. Israel's ability to house and feed its growing population doesn't depend on acquiring more territory, it depends on growing its imports and exports, expanding its infrastructure, and building affordable housing. The overwhelming majority of the food we eat here is imported. The economy isn't much dependent on agriculture or on natural resource extraction. The war has of course been very tough on the economy, and has especially hit the housing construction sector very hard. There's plenty of discussion to be had about the relative role of security concerns, nationalism, religion, political polarization etc. in shaping Israel's policy here but I just don't think there's an economic logic dictating that Israel stands to benefit by trying to absorb the West Bank into itself.
> An opinion poll from January this year showed that only a yaw-dropping 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thought the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza. The option of not launching an operation at all was not even on the ballot.
The 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thinking the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza is לסת-dropping until you realize that Israel is basically the Western version of Iran. And I see you are already making this connection yourself:
> Jewish Israel might very well vanquish the Palestinians. But doing so, they run the risk of becoming more and more like the Arabs themselves.
People have a tendency to exaggerate the degree to which their friends (and spouses) are similar to them. Westerners look back on Hellenic Greece as a similar sort of society to our own, and gloss over the pederasty and bestiality, and the low position of women which was much more typical of nations in the Middle East. White Americans also have a tendency to see characters in Japanese anime as white, regardless of their intended ethnicity. The same thing is going on with Israel. The Israelis may not be typical of Middle Easterners, but whatever their origins and wherever their funding comes from, a Middle Eastern nation is what they are, and America should stop subsidizing their bloodthirsty wars.
>> doing so, they run the risk of becoming more and more like the Arabs themselves.
I somewhat agree with this, though not in the negative sense that you put it.
I don't think the future of Haredim in Israel is authoritarianism. I don't believe in religious coercion, and I sincerely hope that as Haredim adjust to the challenges of running a country they will recognize this. I certainly don’t believe that the Haredim will be add significantly more religious coercion than the current status quo. (Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the lack of public transportation on Saturday is not a new phenomenon.)
However, I do feel that even with zero religious coercion a Haredi majority country will be "more and more like the Arabs themselves". I believe this is a key component in making peace with the Arabs.
Tove once pointed out to me that Sweden has a first world government, economy, and education system, yet they have not managed to deradicalize their Arabs. I refrained from sharing my thoughts then, but I will mention them now.
My theory is that the Arabs don't do well in a modern liberal society without traditional values, with in-your-face capitalism, stiff competition and where sexuality is commodified and paraded in the streets and online.
The first modern pogrom in Israel was in 1929. Why was this? Because the Western European Zionists promoted in-your-face capitalism and militarism and the Arabs felt extremely demeaned and even threatened by it.
You write about the extremism of no public transportation on Saturday. I am not promoting such a policy. I don't promote any religious coercion. However, I wonder if you have ever considered the benefits to mental health and to family life of having one day every week when peace and quiet descend upon a bustling city. Such experiences lead one to wonder if a society with more emphasis on traditional values is more healthy and more conducive to promoting peace.
In conclusion, I acknowledge that much of this is speculative. However, the Israeli experience and especially the Haredi experience is a unique experiment of how a high fertility society can survive in the modern age. I think we should all do our best to judge this experiment favorably.
Anders and I have discussed one thing several times, at least half seriously: Will the ongoing development of Haredim of Israel influence the nature/nurture debate?
From an outside perspective, the Haredim look more or less as backward as the Arabs. They do little of what modern economists predict leads to prosperity. But, as far as I understand, they have a lot of one thing: IQ.
Will that make the difference that makes the Haredim succeed where other tradional-minded peoples stagnate? I can't rule it out. It will be hugely interesting to see more of it.
> But, as far as I understand, they have a lot of one thing: IQ.
Really? I've never encountered this claim before. The Amish don't score as well as mainstream Americans, and it's hard to see why the Haredim would do well, especially given that most of them aren't Ashkenazi.
Must be difficult to IQ test the Amish, since they only attend school until 14 and speak English as a foreign language. But it would be strange if their ban on higher education didn't deter some of their brainiest specimen.
Ah, your wikipedia skills are good! I checked that article before posting and came away with the impression it was a mix of Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Mizrahi Jews.
As for the IQ of the Amish, it's been tested a few times, mostly by people sympathetic to them and quick to dismiss their lower-than-mainstream scores as a result of cultural bias in the tests. My personal impression of the Amish is that they are classic religious conservatives: humble, patient, prosocial, unimaginative, and unintelligent.
I don't think it's just IQ. They also have going for them their strong connections to Haredim and other Orthodox Jews around the world. They are one family and they will evolve together.
>> Even more interesting than politics is the cultural and social aspects. Haredi are poorer and more religious than the average Israeli etc.
This is the punchline of the article, and it is the part that bothers me the most. I very much appreciate this blog because it takes a strong stand against modern Malthusian philosophy. Your strong push for pro-natalism conveys your feelings that more fertility will stimulate more innovation and growth which will overcome the current challenges which humanity now faces. Yet when it comes to Haredim you project the classic modern Malthusian fears.
If today Haredim today are poorer it doesn't follow that the Haredim of tomorrow will bankrupt the country. Haredim of today are poor because they follow a policy of isolationism from the rest of the country. If you want to see what Haredim of tomorrow will look like take a look at Lakewood, NJ. This is the community most similar to the Israeli Haredim. They prioritize Talmud study above all. The elite high schools for the brightest male students have no secular studies whatsoever. Most men continue to study Talmud full time at least a few years after marriage. Yet they manage to support over 50,000 students in private school, saving the government well over half a billion dollars per year. Most households in which the householder is over 40 earn a six-digit income, and a large number earn over $200,000 annually. I don't see why the future Haredim of Israel should be any different. Until now, their isolationism (especially their refusal to serve in the army) prevented them from fully participating in society and the economy, but that is changing already, and it will continue to change as they continue to take over the country.
Additionally, I have never seen proof that Haredim are currently a net burden on the economy. Some points to consider: 1. Some of their lower income is due to their lower average age. 2. They consume far less per capita. 3. Their study halls attract much foreign income, whether in the form of Haredi tourism from abroad, Haredi students from abroad, or simply financial support from admirers across the world. The budgets of many Haredi institutions, especially those for adults, are covered mostly by foreign donations. There probably are more points to make that I am unaware of.
Lakewood is actually very interesting. I tried to make Google explain the economy of Lakewood to me, but I do not know if I got any wiser. My best guess, which is not very good, is that Lakewood makes its money from Jewish tourism and export of Jewish paraphernalia. Exactly how that can generate a high-income economy is unclear to me. Maybe you can shed some light in this area.
To a secular observer it is very strange indeed how lots of people without any secular education can take a place among the top tenth income bracket. Jews are of course famous for their high IQ, which should help, but for most high-income careers (physician, lawyer et cetera) you still need a secular education to start climbing the ladder.
Yes. It is indeed very interesting. I live in Lakewood and I still don't know the full answer! I am still youngish and have time to learn. I would add that the average income in the Orthodox Lakewood community is actually higher than it seems at first glance.
I don't think there is one specific answer. There is very little Jewish tourism in Lakewood. It isn't Israel. And the export of Jewish paraphernalia is not a major business.
I think the intensive study of Talmud together with the high level of responsibility inherent in a high-fertility society teaches people to adapt quickly to whatever life brings them. When it is time for people to find a career, they learn the ropes quickly. There isn't a high percentage of physicians and lawyers, mainly because the training for these professions is hard for a parent of a large family, as your wife complains. Many are in finance or tech. Accounting courses for those in the high 20s are popular and the Lakewood graduates pass the tests fairly easily. From there they often build their way up.
This is just for starters. I don't know the particulars as it varies greatly.
I am not promoting no secular studies in high school. I am merely noting that people in Lakewood don't find it necessary, and that Haredim in general are good at adapting to every situation, which is how they managed such extraordinary growth after the community was almost obliterated. If Haredim would feel that the time has come that they must teach more STEM subjects to children, they will do it.
Come to think of it, the physician career is an excellent example of the Lakewood community adapting to the times.
As I mentioned, it is hard for parents of large families to obtain a full physician degree. 10 years ago, the offices of pediatricians in Lakewood were constantly overbooked due to the fast growth and lack of corresponding growth in the number of physicians. However, recently the U.S. government has been pushing strongly for the use of physician assistants (PAs) and urgent cares. These days every pediatrician has PAs on staff, and every neighborhood has an urgent care. These urgent cares seem to be open constantly and process their patients very quickly. How much do these PAs earn? Will it be enough as their family grows? I don't know. I assume they work hard and utilize well the extra time and lower expense of a PA degree vs. that of a doctor.
(Nursing careers have also become very popular recently, especially among women.)
Another point I probably should correct is that Lakewood is somewhat similar to Israel in that many students come from all over the world to Lakewood to study Talmud, and the scholars of Lakewood teach to people in many places, in various ways. However, I think this is explains only a fraction of the Lakewood finance, though I guess it can explain much of the lack of secular studies in elite boys high schools, as these boys have a high chance of spending their life teaching Talmud.
One last point. Jews benefit not just from a high IQ, but also from an advantage in networking. This is especially relevant in Ultra-Orthodox communities, due to their large extended families, their close-nit communities and the large amount of time they spend together daily at synagogue.
>>One last point. Jews benefit not just from a high IQ, but also from an advantage in networking. This is especially relevant in Ultra-Orthodox communities, due to their large extended families, their close-nit communities and the large amount of time they spend together daily at synagogue.
Having large extended families, close-knit communities and men spending a large amount of time socializing with each other is a formula almost older than the human race itself. It is occurs across the entire Third World. But when Jews are doing it, you don't become the Third World. You become prosperous. So probably you have found a smarter way of doing it.
In case it wasn't clear, my point was that Jews always excelled at commerce and banking due to the fact that the level of trust and camaraderie that existed among Jews throughout the civilized world (wherever they were allowed to live) was very high. I don’t know to what extent this still exists among modern Jews but among Orthodox Jews it is stronger than ever.
Your comparison to Third-world societies gives me the sense that you don't fully grasp the extent of what close-nit means among the Haredi communities. Let me share a bit.
Every Haredi community has a long list of free loan organizations, for everything from the most mundane to long term loans of tens of thousands of dollars without interest or collateral. (All they ask for is Here is a partial list
Every hospital near a Haredi community has a society for visiting the sick and taking care of their needs. During Covid the hospitals had very strict visitation rules, often not allowing any visitors at all. These rules stretched out long after the other rules were canceled. Who brought the NY hospitals to change? The Ultra-Orthodox waged a campaign, which included ads in the NY Times. Why? Because they understand the importance of it. When a family member is sick, they will make shifts to ensure that they are not left alone in the hospital for a moment. Aside from this campaign, they also set up an organization (Well-Tab) which provides video monitors to place at the hospital bed.
Every large Ultra-Orthodox community has volunteer first responders, including paramedics, doctors for consultation, ambulances and even aircraft with a record response time to any medical emergency.
It is fairly common for young healthy individuals to donate a kidney to a perfect stranger.
Large communities have organizations that will come assist with anything from roadside assistance to finding a lost diamond ring. Even without any organizations, a Jew stuck on the side of the road anywhere near an Orthodox community can expect that someone will pull over to offer assistance.
There are organizations to help women on bedrest, women who had a loss of pregnancy, families who lost a child, families with a member hospitalized, families with many small children, single parents, orphaned children, couples struggling to have children etc. For children with special needs Lakewood has not only their own public school established by the Orthodox community, but also a large Center for after school, Sundays etc. And on the Sabbath and holidays teenage girls will come to your house to take these children out and entertain them. Families with young children or with other special needs have teenage girls come to their house in the evenings at no charge, girls who they never met before and may never meet again. There is a sleep-away summer camp for children with special needs (Camp Schi) and another one for children with cancer (Camp Simcha).
Most of these organizations are not affiliated with any religious body. They are run by regular "simple" individuals.
This is just a taste. Perhaps all this is just normal Third World activities, especially in communities which are "less civic-minded". I don't know. I haven't studied other societies much.
>>Perhaps all this is just normal Third World activities, especially in communities which are "less civic-minded".
Nope. It is clearly not normal Third World activities. I know a person who built a house in Guatemala. He hired a friend to deliver concrete to the roof terrace. The friend delivered most of the concrete. But some he pilfered away to another construction site, so the roof started to leak after a few months. That is the Third World! People can trust each other so little that they can't do much much business at all.
All over the Third World, there seem to be attempts at remedying this state of things. People build mosques and churches. Muslims organize Quran schools. Superficially, to an outsider, it looks a lot like they are trying to do what Orthodox Jews are doing. Even the gender structure tends to be the same: Women busy themselves with everyday subsistence, men focus more or building the bigger community. And still, Orthodox Jews are thriving while the Third World remains poor and desorganized.
I realize there must be some secret sauce among the Jews that is difficult for other peoples to make. I would really like to search a bit deeper for the recipe. Because for an outsider, it is not obvious what sets the Ultra-Orthodox Jews apart from other traditionalist populations, except high IQ. I can se that the Ultra-Orthodox Jews succeed in building community where others are failing, but I can't clearly grasp why.
I think what you are saying is very interesting on a general plan. For a long time I have suspected that higher education is mainly a way to drill young people in cultural values in general - not to specifically prepare them for the labor market. What you are saying strongly supports that suspicion.
At what age, approximately, do Jewish men in Lakewood start to work for a living? Who provides for them, and their families, before that happens?
>>At what age, approximately, do Jewish men in Lakewood start to work for a living?
There is no single answer. Every individual is different.
>>Who provides for them, and their families, before that happens?
Same as above. However, the main 3 factors are (a) the women work hard (yet, as I've mentioned before studies show that they are very happy), (b) the parents often give some some financial support for the first (5?) years (this is part of the reason why so many older households earn well over 200k annually), (c) see here https://www.adireihatorah.com/about
In any case, I find this intriguing. What you are saying is, more or less, that there is a people who
1. Explicitly focus their community on something else than earning money and
2. nonetheless, earn a lot of money
This should be extremely interesting for everyone who cares about fertility. Mainstream Westerners are so busy producing stuff that we don't have the time to have children. You describe a subculture where young people are actively discouraged from investing all they have in getting good jobs, and nonetheless they are doing fine on a financial level. If the secular majority can copy that, our civilization is not doomed after all.
This is exactly the point I am trying to bring out, that for those who see low fertility as a problem they should be looking at Haredi society as an extremely important experiment. Certainly they have what to improve, but we should be rooting for their success.
Thank you very much. This is really very interesting.
It also squares well with the old adage that it does not matter very much what you do as long as you are very good at it. What surprises me a bit is that people with large families have time for the sort of obsession that is usually required to succeed outside of the formal channels.
Since you specifically mention finance, I must also ask: I assume there is a lot of migration between Lakewood and New York City. Could some (or a lot) of Lakewood's financial industry be sort of outsourced New York finance? If so, it is kind of hard to replicate. Most people, myself included, do not live 90 minutes from the world's premier financial center.
Thank you for the link. The article was informative but the rest of the paper looks even more so. I had never heard about Mispacha before, but it looks really interesting.
If anything, the problem is that there is too much info, and it may be hard to sift through and get to the root of their culture. I think the hardest part of analyzing the Haredim is the temptation to take things out of context and view them from a secular perspective when in reality the larger picture changes things drastically.
If I may, I would note one example, which is feminism. To the outsider it may appear that we treat our women similar to the way Arabs do. However, that view ignores the strong inhibitions we place upon our men. I believe that most Ultra-Orthodox women view themself as far more liberated than secular women and as lucky to live in a society where men behave this way. The restrictions on them may be hard, perhaps too harsh, but they feel it is worth it. Understandably, this may be hard for secular society to relate to, but growing up in Orthodox society creates a different mindset.
I don't know if this is the best example, but hopefully you will understand my point. If you have more questions I am available.
Yes. To a large extent Lakewood is a suburb of NY. However, in recent years Lakewood has become a center of its own. Many large office buildings have been built in the last decade. Most of the younger generation does not commute to NY.
>> Why would anyone want war over peace? Religious and historical aspects aside, there is an obvious explanation: demography. Israel is severely lacking in land and its population is growing rapidly.
Yuval already explained that this is not the right answer. The reason for the settlements is not a lack of land but rather (a) religious messianism (which Haredim oppose), (b) the feeling that a Jewish presence in these areas is important for security, (c) a conviction that a 2 or 3 state solution is impractical (mostly for security reasons) and must be prevented.
On the question of the rationality of the war I don't dare to think that I know enough to form an opinion. However, it does seem possible that if Israel had shown weakness, they would have exposed themselves to the risk of subsequent attacks which may be much worse, especially if they come for Hezbollah. Is there any real hope of "making the Arabs less angry"? I have never seen a clear path to this, without giving them full citizenship and freedom of movement throughout Israel.
Neither Iran nor any of its proxies or affiliates ever showed any interest in developing a real peace with Israel.
Additionally, the idea of telling Israelis not to retaliate flies in the face of everything Zionism stands for. Zionism was established by people who wanted to rectify thousands of years of being told they can't stick up for themselves.
I think it is relevant to note that this recalls the debate between Haredim and Zionists regarding who was negligent during the Holocaust. The Zionists accuse the victims of not standing up for themselves, though there is no evidence that standing up for themselves would have saved them. The Haredim accuse the Zionists of blocking attempts to bribe Nazis, despite the evidence that Jews were saved this way.
If placating the Arabs will not work can there possibly be any long-term solution?
I believe the only long-term solution is to overwhelm the Arabs demographically. This is possible, as the Arab fertility rate is plunging https://www.palquest.org/en/chart/14380/demography-and-palestine-question-ii-fertility-rate - fertility rate. If there are enough Jews in Israel, Gaza can be annexed to Israel and its residents can be offered full Israeli citizenship. Their schools and streets will be controlled by Israel and the populace deradicalized.
I have been thinking about this for the last few days. I would love to fully respond. However, I don't have the time to do it justice. Additionally, I don't live in Israel, and I don't follow the details of Israeli news. I feel especially uncomfortable debating Yuval as he is living through this.
I would like to make a few comments though.
>> These parties are almost always adherents of a militarily strong Israel and avid supporters of West Bank settlements.
Is this true? See this post https://tamritz.substack.com/p/use-ultra-orthodox-theology-to-save. She is pretty accurate. Rabbi Shach, one of the most influential Charedi rabbis ever (he established the Litvishe faction of Agudas Yisroel, was influential in the establishment of Shas, and was the "leader of the yeshivos"), strongly opposed the pushback against land for peace. The only "settlement" he allowed his followers to live in was Modiin Ilit, and even that permission came extremely reluctantly, as the establishment left no other option.
It is hard for me to understand how a community which barely serves in the military can be depicted as "almost always adherents of a militarily strong Israel". Clearly, they identify with the right only because the right respects their religion.
The religious community whose followers are adherents of a militarily strong Israel and avid supporters of West Bank settlements is heavily overrepresented on the front line. Approximately half of the casualties among Israeli soldiers in the war grew up in a DL (Dati Leumi=National Religious) community. But they are not Haredi.
Thousands of educated Westernera living in America or Israel know as much as I do if not more. If someone had a specific question, I'd probably try to answer it for them.
Most people (especially those promoting their writing & ideas online) aren't interested in facts that don't conform to their ideas.
Do you think that the world needs more people talking/writing about Israel? Especially people who begin by reciting their cred ("I have five siblings living in Israel "; "I spent two summers working on a Kibbutz", "I once worked with Bibi's former dog walker") before pontificating.
What I like about this blog is the dispassionate and rational discussion of how peoples work (e.g., in a mechanistic way).
I think Israel is interesting in this way because you can actually see how things work in the real-time. I am of course very emotionally invested here, so it's a challenge...
>>Do you think that the world needs more people talking/writing about Israel? Especially people who begin by reciting their cred ("I have five siblings living in Israel "; "I spent two summers working on a Kibbutz", "I once worked with Bibi's former dog walker") before pontificating.
I definitely think so. As things are, most people who write about Israel and the Palestinians in English do it as a practice in moral philosophy. They use the formula "if x is true, is x then morally justifiable according to us Westerners?" The central question for most debaters seems to be "what should a good Westerner think?" Not "what is actually happening?" I think the latter question is much more interesting. And to get more answers to that question, we need people who know something more than what is already in the English-language newspapers.
It's definitely not because of shortage of land. The Negev area is a third of Israel and is very sparsely populated. The whole north edge of Israel has been evacuated since the start of the war, with no return date.
The ultra-right ultra-religious jewish-supremacy sects have a "The Whole Land of Israel" concept, where it is God's will that the jews will control all of the biblical land of Israel (yes, yes, from the river to the sea). Add to that the deep enmity and racism towards arabs and that's why the contested areas are the West Bank and Gaza, even though larger and better unpopulated areas exist.
If you ask what got us here, I think it all originated in several "original sins" that were never addressed:
1. What does a "jewish state" means? I believe the "founding fathers" meant that it will be a place for the people who identify as jews, and/or are jewish by ethnicity. That's how Israel was mostly secular and liberal. But then came the religious people and took ownership of judaism as a religion. In addition, the ultra-orthodox sect, which was a very small minority, somehow got into law that they are the only "official" sect of judaism here - they are the only ones allowed to marry and bury, for example. Add to this the rapid growth and not contributing either financially or in the military and you get to a very bad place after a few decades.
We saw this coming many many years, but did nothing about it, for a variety of reasons.
2. Even since before WW1, the relationship between the new jewish immigrants and the native arab population were deteriorating. When Israel was established, we had a big war with all the neighboring Arab states.
We then learned to "live by the sword" and started to hate Arabs. During the 6 day war we conquered Gaza and the West Bank (which I believe was done primarily due to "security reasons", but maybe that's a rationalization) and the The Occupation started.
There's a slogan in the left here that "The Occupation Corrupts", and that's exactly what happened.
We can discuss the mechanics of how any occupation corrupts since the dawn of time (e.g., The Spartans), but the fact remains that Israel became more racist and militant, with the religious right becoming right-on "white supremacists".
3. Because we couldn't agree on it at the beginning, Israel has no Constitution. That means that the political system here was always fragile.
4. A more prosaic evil, of a corrupt and manipulative populist coming to power and keeping it for too long, destroying strong opposition and surronding himself with opportunits and corrupt people, who lett all those issues fester for too long.
As a (as I understand it) secular Israeli, how do you think of the future for you and your children? Is emigration on the table or do you see a manageable future in Israel? Do you think the more religious and nationalist and the more secular and more typically Western-minded will learn to get along?
We were going in a bad direction for a long while (e.g., the Elor Azaria incident, when a soldier executed a prisoner and many prominent Rabbis and political leaders cheered him on), but since the last elections we are in a sharp fall, that is now clear to all.
Rubi Rivlin, the former president of Israel had a speech about the "four tribes" in Israel - the secular jews, the zionist-religious jews (which include the settlers), the Charedi jews and the arabs.
Demographically we are nearing the point where these four tribes will be about the same size.
In his speech he urged us to learn to integrate and live together, but this is not the current trend.
At the very best, it would be possible to live side-by-side, but realistically there are many points of contention between any two tribes.
From a moral perspective it is already very difficult for me here. I definitely feel we are "the bad guys" (even if there are other bad guys around).
From a personal safety perspective, it is becoming much more dangerous here. I dread the day when my son will need to enlist into the army (which is mandatory).
From an economic perspective, it has been OK here up till now, but this is already starting to change for the worst.
So in sum - yes, I very much want to emigrate. This is a subject that is constantly talked about and many families are already leaving.
It is hard because we built our lifes here, and we suspect that life as emigres will be hard for us (but maybe better for the children). My wife especially is resistant to the idea.
I tell myself that events in the near future will force our hand in any case.
As to where to go, I don't know. I hear that Sweden is very beautiful this time of year :)
When in the Middle East, you don't have to search for bad guys for long. Or in most corners of the world, actually, except the thankfully (still) very protected West.
Sweden is very beautiful, at least parts of it. And even better, there is beautiful land for sale rather cheaply. Still, I think there are better alternatives. The West as a whole is in decline, but the decline still seems worse in Sweden than in its neighbors. Lawlessness and criminal gangs is one problem. Excessive state oppression against decent citizens is, in my opinion, an even worse problem. Right now there is some kind of discussion in Sweden about the extremely rigid school attendance laws. Or not a discussion really. Mostly it is monologues held by teachers and politicians about why everyone child must attend their great child prison (weirdly, they sometimes say that the reason is that the children learn so little). I think both Denmark, Norway and Finland are a bit more sane, but that could be because I don't get the subtle absurdities of their duck ponds.
Also, looking explicitly Jewish is out of the question in Sweden due to Arabs who don't like Jews, but I guess you aren't visibly Jewish anyway.
If you like cities, I think Copenhagen is a nice one. And if you like beautiful countryside in the middle of nowhere, the Danish isle of Bornholm is a hit. But ask someone Danish at first, they might have dark secrets that I don't see.
To your excellent points I just want to add the factor of intra-Jewish racism. Israel was founded by European Jews, who then took in large numbers of Oriental Jews to populate the new country. The Europeans believed they would continue ruling due to their innate superiorness. But this did not happen. And ever since the Likud victory in 1977 the secular, European Jews have been fighting a rear-guard action to preserve as much as possible of the secular, liberal, European state they once founded.
This definitely exists. Personally I wouldn't call it "racism" as it seems to me of a class/tribe kind of thing, but you are correct that Netanyahu somehow became (probably inherited from Begin) the champion of fighting against the discrimination of the founding generation. The fact that his policies are even worse for his constituents is one of those ironies common in history.
As an Israeli, representing only my opinions and worldviews, I think most of what said here is accurate enough.
IMHO, though, I think the "real story" of the recent precipitous decline of Israel is the coup by Netanyahu.
Israel's current government is comically inept. The Oct. 7th massacre never would've happened if there were even semi-decent people in office, not to mention all the horrific mistakes done since.
The Haredis and other ultra-religious and/or fanatic groups are a real threat to the continuing existance of Israel (which cannot survive without the liberal economy) but we had many decades to deal with these thereats, and to continue to peace talks with the palestinians, if Bibi would not have ruled for so long and only let everything fester.
I have always felt that Israel's political problems arise from the ultra low threshold for party representation(wikipedia tells me it has progressively risen to 3.25% of the vote, but I think 5% or even 7.5% would be better) for political party representation in parliament (the Knesset), but no doubt that is a simplification.
I lived in both Israel and Syria back in the '70s. I've been impressed by Israel's political stability given the scale and diversity of peoples that have become citizens since then.
I'm not an expert in the dynamics caused by these changes, but the general sentiment in my Twitter feed is that the latest downward spiral was actually accelerated when the threshold was raised.
This led to more "blockish" behavior, where all the parties vote together and there is less chance for dissent from individual MPs.
That's intuitive ie the raised %age increases the power of parties over individual MPs. From my perspective more 'blockish' behaviour does tend to suppress extremes and leads to more reliable implementation of policy programmes. However, there have been plenty of times when I have personally disagreed with a policy programme in which case I just have to wait until the next election to express my disagreement.
Maybe too a better functioning government would mean that the Courts would be less inclined to rule on law, though even our (NZ) rather new and polite Supreme Court is somewhat inclined to. ie the NZ government has rewritten law when it has not accepted an interpretation by the Courts. Though without international furore seen when Israel does it.
I do not know enough about Israeli politics to know if Netanyahu's rule can truthfully be described as a coup. From my vantage point it looks more like Netanyahu is a shrewd political operator. Probably too shrewd. To continue my other comment it looks as Netanyahu is a secular European Jew who has opportunistically allied with religious Oriental Jews. Maybe Netanyahu is exploiting the Mizrahi votes to stay in power. Or maybe the Mizrahi voters are using Netanyahu to rearrange the board without having to do the dirty work themselves. Who will turn out on top is difficult to say (at least for me).
Thinking all of this over, it feels to me Israel is a novel experiment.
A purposefully constructed nation state comprised of different peoples, the great majority of which are immigrants, is not something I think has been tried before.
As an engineer, I know firsthand the folly of trying to construct a "solution" to a very complicated problem that will survive for many years.
Maybe the USA is the closest example, but it of course has many significant changes (and maybe it is also suffering in similar ways).
I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
> I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
Humans always find reasons to divide into groups. I know of a person who was refused at a shop in Stockholm in the 1960-ies because her accent identified her as a person from the southern-most part of Sweden. She was told "we don't serve your kind here". Ironically nowadays Swedish nationalism seems to have its strongest support in the southern-most part of Sweden. The major groups have shifted.
>>I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
It feels suffocating! I guess that is the nature of human society: it is not completely pleasant anywhere. That is one reason to apply a coldly rational approach: Living in a society always feels a bit unpleasant. The sport is to avoid the ones heading for worse disaster than the rest.
In your opinion: Why are some Israeli groups so eager to grab Palestinian land? Is there a tangible shortage of land that makes people invent excuses? Why is settling the West Bank considered to be such a good idea in parts of Israeli society?
As a huge fan of your & your wife's writings, I'm genuinely sorry to say that this essay bungles basic sociological/societal facts.
I'm an American Orthodox Jew with five siblings living in Israel . This article is absurd.
You blur together Litvish, Chassidic, Lubavitch, & Sefardi Chareidim with Nationalist Chardal settlers and traditional religious Zionists.
Your understanding of the Chareidi exemption (P'Tur) from Army service is weak at best and your grasp of the evolving Chareidi relationships with the State (Medinah) & Zionism is severely lacking.
I recommend that next time you write on this topic have someone with greater knowledge of the situation.
I thought it was a pretty good representation of what a lot of western non-jews are seeing in the Israeli war in gaza. Sometimes knowing the details about the trees can obscure the outline of the forest they form.
I am the first to admit that my knowledge of Orthodox Jews is rudimentary at best. I do find them very interesting, and I hope to learn more, but I still have some way to go. For this particular article I do not think my ignorance is a fatal flaw. I do treat Haredis as a solid block, which they clearly are not, but I do believe I have got the general characteristics about right. My assumptions are of course based on the current situation. And the internal dynamics of the Haredi community may change circumstances in ways that are unexpected to me. Since the internet never forgets I expect to have plenty of time to make excuses for this when it actually happens.
Read the Wikipedia entry on Shas? They are a Chareidi Mizrachi political/social/educational organization whose members often served in the army.
You also miss the point that the Yeshiva student exemptions means that Chareidi men can't legally get jobs until they are older & married because they are officially learning in Yeshiva..
A major reason to change the system is to get more Chareidim into the workforce.
The Mizrachi jews also don't serve in the army as a rule.
There was indeed more of them then the Ashkenazi but in absolute numbers both are negligible, and in recent years it has been even less for all Haredi's.
As for the law - this law has been proposed and is strongly defended by the Charedi leadership.
This essentially "locks" the young Charedi men in the Yeshivas for many years, leaving them at the mercy of the leadership to provide for them (since they mush "study" in a formal Yeshiva to not go to the army).
The last government, which had no Charedis, actually tried to lower the age at which Charedi's are exempt from service to get them to go to work (since getting them to join the army was considered a lost cause at that point).
>>I'm an American Orthodox Jew with five siblings living in Israel . This article is absurd.
You blur together Litvish, Chassidic, Lubavitch, & Sefardi Chareidim with Nationalist Chardal settlers and traditional religious Zionists.
Your understanding of the Chareidi exemption (P'Tur) from Army service is weak at best and your grasp of the evolving Chareidi relationships with the State (Medinah) & Zionism is severely lacking.
/
I can speak for both Anders and me when I'm saying our knowledge of traditional religious groups like Orthodox Jews does not match our interest. It is actually my fault that the above post is not called "Ramblings about Israel and the Gaza War" (I thought it was no more rambling than the average Substack post on the issue, of which there are many).
The linguistic and cultural barriers are a problem for us. Israel clearly is a world of its own and we know that, as outsiders, we only get a glimpse. If you, or anybody else who reads this, would volunteer as an Israel consultant we would be very grateful.
I know little about the actual situation in Israel right now but thought the essay provided depth, context and understanding that I had otherwise not been aware of (I had not known, for instance, that there are Israeli military units specifically designed to be compatible for traditional religious Jews).
Based on the facts, as presented, I found the essay persuasive. However, I do not really know the facts, let alone additional relevant factors that may underlie them. What corrections would you offer to the essay, beyond the general assertion that it was lacking?
If I had the time to write a proper list of corrections, I might consider it, even though I strenuously try to avoid writing about Israel. But I don't.
If you don't even know that there have been Yeshivot built around Army service for over 50 years, how do you expect to grasp the complicated situation around army service & religion
One clear observation I made from the essay was that the religious exemptions Israel offers some communities are not sustainable and likely soon to end.
Is that a realistic understanding of the current situation?
I've deliberately made it a yes/no question, though would of course also be interested in a longer answer.
I know that if I was in the Israeli army now, I'd be doing my best while very unhappy about how I was still there now. I'd also no longer be on the fence about religious exemptions for military service. I'd be like 'Fight by my side or leave, anything else risks Israel itself'. I'd be clear and relentless about that, in exactly the kind of way I've seen Israelis behave in other situations (to their credit, and my admiration).
As an outsider I suggest that if Israeli society is as fractured as has been suggested in the comments here:
"Rubi Rivlin, the former president of Israel had a speech about the "four tribes" in Israel - the secular jews, the zionist-religious jews (which include the settlers), the Charedi jews and the arabs."
Then probably no one tribe holds moral authority and it will come down to who holds the economic power and whether they and an elected abolitionist government act in concert.
In this case there would be howls of outrage, but words are merely hot air easily swept aide by the determined, and (most) Yeshiva students would serve in the army
E.g. families with 7-12 children without Internet or any secular literature at home. Where any contact between unrelated men & women is strictly forbidden. Whose religion is central to their existences & identities.
Joining Tzahal would be a death blow to their religiousity as individuals & communally.
It could easily be formulated as *Yaharog ve-Lo Yaavor* (sins which require martyrdom before violating).
If you think that the majority of Chareidim & their Gedolim (Rabbinic leadership) will just follow a law & have Yeshiva students join the army then this conversation is silly.
>>even though I strenuously try to avoid writing about Israel
May I ask why? You know things that most mainstream Westerners don't know and you know how to speak to mainstream Westerners. The world depends on people like you for the transfer of knowledge from one group of people to another.
"Why would anyone want war over peace? Religious and historical aspects aside, there is an obvious explanation: demography. Israel is severely lacking in land and its population is growing rapidly. The classic solution to that problem is to encroach on your neighbors land. Something Israel has been doing more or less since its inception. "
It's true that Israel is very small but I don't think the amount of land is the main issue. Lack of land or resources is rarely the main cause for war, especially in modern times. And Especially not the land where Gaza is.
In any case. The game theoretical calculus is interesting. Given that Hamas would continuue to pose a threat against Israel and it's people if Israel did nothing after October 7, how could Israels government not take action to eliminate Hamas? As international bystanders we'd much like them to not have invaded Gaza and maybe just improved their defenses or done some raids, but that would be unpopular in Israel and it's hard to see any other viable path than more or less what they did. Which isn't very encouraging given how horrible that turned out.
Gaza will be a threat to Israel as long as it is populated by angry Arabs. There are only two viable solutions to that problem. The first being complete ethnic cleansing and the second being to make the Gazans less angry. At the moment Israel is doing neither, meaning that they will not solve anything. Sure, they are destroying military infrastructure in Gaza which will hamper any future attacks on Israel proper. But this infrastructure is easily rebuilt by Hamas or whoever succeeds them.
I recall a blog post from earlier this year by Richard Hanania where he made the argument that a vast majority of Gazans in particular and Palestinians in general already disliked Israel so much that even though Israel were going to be really brutal in Gaza it couldn't make Palestinians hate them much more than they already did...
The hate isn't just based on political or historical grievances of who took who's land, but on fundamentally irreconcilable religious differences with respect to the land and the people who lived there, etc. And the same goes for the Haredim and orthodox jews vis avis the Muslims.
That said, the solution can't be ethnic cleansing. But especially after the current Gaza war it's hard to see any amicable solution even though some kind of two state solution is probably the only way to go down the line
A comment on Americans being unsuccessful in their wars: I’d say the one in Afghanistan was, game theoretically speaking, a success. When a population gets attacked from outside they tend to feel strong collective anger and an urge to respond if they are strong enough. I guess it’s probably ingrained evolutionarily. After the Twin Towers attack, 88% of Americans supported the war (that’s less than Israelis today but then again, in the Twin Towers no babies were manually beheaded). The game theoretic justification for such a disproportionately strong response is of course teaching the enemy to think twice before trying such a thing next time. The emotional, natural, evolutionarily explainable meaning of the American-Afghanistan war was to show us all that one doesn’t mess with America, and this message was loud and clear. The Taliban was removed from power for almost a generation and had to restructure from a strong centrally-led organization to quasi-autonomous smaller groups. If I was a terrorist planning a large-scale attack on America, I would think quite seriously about what happened in Afghanistan. The later post-hoc justifications for the war – we are bringing them democracy, they may have an atomic bomb – were just that: post-hoc.
Supposedly the main reason for the current Gaza war is the same (as you also said): the population is angry and wants to show how it goes when you attack the children of Israel. This is simple, natural, and unpreventable; all the other explanations are just post-hoc reasoning. Humans are predictable like this; Hamas needed war, they knew the best way to get it was to go and behead some babies, rape some women, so this is what they did. The war wasn’t preventable after that. In some ways, it’s a success (loud signal re not messing with Israel), in other ways, it’s not (international standing).
This is all a bit speculative since so little of what happened is known for sure, but as far as I have understood what happened in 2001, there was a good chance that Afghanistan would have handed over the Al-Qaeda leadership to the US if they would have given it a little more time and diplomatic effort.
As it turned out now the Talibans were expelled. But their generation away from power seems to just have made them stronger. And this came at a truly astronomical cost to America.
The problem with the deterrent you are talking about is that it is capricious. Afghanistan harbored Usama bin Laden. But Usama bin Laden was not directly involved in the 9/11 attack. The attackers were mostly Saudis. And they all died in the attack, in general it is unclear what can deter a suicide attacker. They thrive on enmity, something that the American wars created in abundance.
Bin Laden was also a Saudi. Did you mean "Afghanistan harbored Usama bin Laden but was not directly involved in the 9/11 attack. The attackers were mostly Saudis" and Yemenis.
I interpreted it as Usama bin Laden just being a distant financer, which I wasn't aware of. DuckDuckGo has been down for hours and I'd rather not explore this topic on Google... Anders please enlighten us.
It was not well-known at the time, but Usama bin Laden was actually not a suspect in the 9/11 attacks. If you looked at FBI's most wanted lists back in the day (they are probably still available through some web archive service) you could see that Usama bin Laden was wanted for the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania (and maybe something else I have forgotten about) but not for 9/11. And this squares with the rest of the available information. Usama bin Laden was clearly an ideological inspiration to the 9/11 attackers. But he was not at all involved in the practical planning and, as far as I have understood it, not even one of the financiers. For the United States to start a war to get their hands on him specifically was always kind of strange.
Perhaps one other thing he was wanted for was the bomb that went off in the parking garage below one of the World Trande Center towers in the late nineties?
Thanks, interesting. I cleary remember contemporary media claiming that Usama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks. And the newspaper headline "It is done" after the special forces operation against him, suggesting closure after 9/11.
Were the attackers not members of Al-Qaeda? Or was Al-Qaeda just a franchise brand for a set of ideas, not an actual organisation?
Why do Neocons want failed states? Is it because it perpetuates war or because the chaos allows them to revolutionize the targeted peoples/states. I'm thinking of Peter in GoT - chaos is a ladder.
I don't understand how Saddam/Iraq was a threat to Israel or Saudi Arabia. Overthrowing him made Iraq more aligned with Iran given its Shia majority, destroyed Christian communities and led to the rise of ISIS.
Need I remind you of how none other than Netanyahu went to the Congress to demand that the United States attack Iraq?
And the idea that the neocons care about the fate of the Christians of Iraq is a hoot. Since you mentioned them, the Christians, Yazidis, Zoroastrians and other communities of Iraq survived for centuries, and often thrived. They survived the Crusades, the Mongols, the Persians, Tamerlane, Tamahsp, Baibars, Murad, Saddam Hussein and many others.
>>Humans are predictable like this; Hamas needed war, they knew the best way to get it was to go and behead some babies, rape some women, so this is what they did.
But imagine what power it can give a people not to be manipulable this way. Hamas made the first move. Israel just followed. The ability not to follow such simple moves gives an advantage in itself.
I'm afraid that you don't even need indoctrination to react that way to a gesture like that of Hamas last autumn: could be simple human nature. And overwinning certain aspects of human nature is what has made societies successful.
Both "sides" have been making moves and counter moves for a very long time, most notably when zionist (self-admitted terrorists) ethnically cleansed large parts of what is now Israel, in the process creating Gaza in 1948 (the Nakba).
After WW1, when the Ottoman Turks (not "Arabs") lost the territory to Britian/France, zionists (or rather Jews in general) began to aggressively "colonize" Palestine when economic conditions improved. Arab/muslim grievances against the "west" are very old, but the British betrayal of Arab nationalism during the "Mandate" era (Lawrence of Arabia, etc.) increased
There is an evolutionary-archetypal cultural impedance mismatch between pastoralist gene pools (Arab/Muslim) and agrarian-industrial gene pools (the West) that exceeds any existing methods of conflict resolution, including secular-liberal western Constitutional ones (formal law, rule of law).
The basic ecological reality is that in a geopolitical and geographical (especially climatological) sense, the middle east is hostile to the outside agrarian-industrial western archetype, and favorable to the "indigenous" (pre-liberal/secular) pastoralist archetype.
But the middle east is doomed by being at the junction of some of the most important trade routes in human history, so outside meddling is inevitable, if unfortunate.
Pre-liberal culture (pastoralist archetype) is more adapted, due to its "primitive" nature, to the harsh realities of the middle east (hostile climate, historically inbred gene pool, illiteracy, poor, starving peasant societies, little or no middle class), which create a cultural "gravity well" that Israel is getting sucked down into.
Israel's survival dooms it to being a colonial outpost. As soon as it no longer serves the corrupt special interests of the Deep State/Military-Industrial-Complex, its regression to a tribalistic social form will doom it, just as the environment and history of the middle east and its trade routes doom it to perpetual war and conflict.
European Jews (whose Slavic ancestors converted during the late Roman and Byzantine empires), whose DNA has almost ZERO origin in any middle eastern gene pool, made an enormous "ecological" and cultural mistake in re-colonizing Palestine in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
They have been doing pastoralism in the middle east for something like 15,000 years, which is why, given the geography/climate the PSYCHOLOGICAL ARCHETYPE under discussion is very deeply entrenched.
re: They stared into the Abyss and it stared back.
The ultra zionist "far right" in Israel made very clear in the 1990s that it had no interest in a peace deal with Palestinians. A ultra zionist lunatic killed Rabin for trying to reach such a peace deal with Arafat. At that point no sane Arab would have trusted anything that the ultra zionist lunatics, including Netanyahu, said or did.
Israel has been ruled most of the time for over 20 years by doomed, insane people that are being sucked into a pre-liberal cultural gravity well.
(See Eric Weinstein's debate with Sam Harris on the Triggernometry blog, in which Weinstein tells Harris that he is "being invited into the Abyss".)
Gaza has been turned into a ghetto. The only one who benefits from this is Netanyahu, who is at least a narcissist, if not an unpoliced psychopath. So the world is stuffed until we police these monsters.
I have noticed on the internet one is not permitted to consign others to an out-group by referring to them as base animals, rather 'civilised' people call them narcissists and psychopaths.
I hope you feel admonished for your tribal expressions of authoritarian dogmatism.
Social scientists have very well established ways of identifying sociopaths, psychopaths, narcissists and related/other "Cluster B" mentally dysfunctional, power hungry pathological individuals.
Netanyahu himself OPENLY ADMITTED on USA TV in the 1980s that Israel was founded by "terrorists" (on PBS, William F. Buckley Jr.'s conversative program "Firing Line").
It is astonishing how successful ultra zionist propaganda has been in brainwashing people such that they don't understand even the most basic facts of history.
I can see you feel strongly about this. Apparently too strongly to think about Israel and its current actions dispassionately. As you probably can't have any impact on the outcome I suggest you take it less personally.
probably not, I said we do not police narcissists or their subset psychopaths...
in any case they are not an out-group, they are fully a part of the human continuum, minus the worldbuilding capabilities of the more empathetic, (and assuming I refer to them as an outgroup is part of the refusal to police them, it's woke). They are monster versions of the rest of us, and are animals only as far as we all are.
I take a more gentle view of the monsters. They have perspectives, experiences, and feelings. What they do doesn't bring them happiness. In a sense they're like people with any other mental disorder.
Even if most people admit schizophrenics need to be monitored and cared for, they don't generally think schizophrenics should be punished, or blame them for being crazy. Psychopathy and Narcissism are heritable conditions just like schizophrenia.
For some generational family history on religious groups fleeing military service (Mennonites across the steppe) I can recommend Sofia Samatar with her The White Mosque: A Memoir. London: Hurst & Company, 2022. ISBN 978-1-78738-807-9
""In the late nineteenth century, a group of German-speaking Mennonites traveled from Russia into Central Asia, where their charismatic leader predicted Christ would return. Over a century later, Sofia Samatar joins a tour following their path, fascinated not by the hardships of their journey, but by its aftermath: the establishment of a small Christian village in the Muslim Khanate of Khiva. Named Ak Metchet, 'The White Mosque,' after the Mennonites' whitewashed church, the village lasted for fifty years. In pursuit of this curious history, Samatar discovers a variety of characters whose lives intersect around the ancient Silk Road, from a fifteenth-century astronomer-king, to an intrepid Swiss woman traveler of the 1930s, to the first Uzbek photographer, and explores such topics as Central Asian cinema, Mennonite martyrs, and Samatar's own complex upbringing as the daughter of a Swiss-Mennonite and a Somali-Muslim, raised as a Mennonite of color in America. A secular pilgrimage to a lost village and a near-forgotten history, The White Mosque traces the porous and ever-expanding borders of identity, asking: How do we enter the stories of others? And how, out of the tissue of life, with its weird incidents, buried archives, and startling connections, does a person construct a self?"-- Front jacket flap"
> An opinion poll from January this year showed that only a yaw-dropping 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thought the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza. The option of not launching an operation at all was not even on the ballot.
I don't follow this war, or any war for that matter so I can't opine on this. However, I imagine that the chair of urban warfare studies with the Modern War Institute at West Point has the credentials to opine on this, and he agrees with the opinion of most Israelis. In fact, he states that the U.S. is causing great damage to Gaza by pressuring Israel to let up.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/17/opinions/israel-gaza-hamas-war-us-arms-spencer/index.html
Remember, this poll was taken a while ago, in January, so today the opinion of many Israelis may be to the left of the chair of urban warfare studies with the Modern War Institute at West Point.
Two comments
1) I understand why it makes sense looking from the outside to think of Israel as having two ethnicities, one secular and one Haredi—but still I think it's not right. I'm an American Jew and I've been living in Israel for more than a decade now. I meet a lot of people who used to be Haredi and are now secular, or who used to be secular and are now Haredi. I've even met people who have gone back and forth multiple times, or who have lived most of their lives somehow straddling that divide. The former Haredi, now secular types seem to have had a fairly easy time integrating into secular Israeli society and getting good jobs—I'm fully aware there is a lot that most Haredi schools don't teach in terms of science and math, but the graduates seem for the most part to have decent learning skills and work ethic. I don't think it's right to conceive of Haredi enclaves as being slums of an ethnic underclass, even if they are relatively poorer in statistical terms.
And I think there's a lot of dynamism within the Haredi world in terms of competing streams of thought—you have some groups that are going more closed-off over time while others grow more open, and a lot of people adjusting, moving their family from one Haredi sub-group to another that's a better fit. Keep in mind, this is a culture almost all informed observers wrote off for dead in the 1950s, arguing that this way of life couldn't survive modernity and the elimination of the small-town east European culture that it thrived in. Then there was big demographic growth and also a big return-to-religion movement in Israel in the 1970s and 1980s, and now there are signs that trend is reversing and there may be more people leaving the Haredi community than joining it. There's going to be a lot of social change ahead, neither I nor anyone else can predict how it turns out but current trends just continuing unchanged for decades ahead seems like the least likely scenario to me. My suspicion is that the Haredi community's continued growth will depend to a large extent on its ability to narrow at least somewhat the economic gap between their adherents and the general population—because otherwise the temptation for young people to leave the community will grow.
2) I also understand why the idea of Israel grabbing the West Bank to resolve demographic issues makes sense if you have a background in world history—but I think it's anachronistic. Israel's ability to house and feed its growing population doesn't depend on acquiring more territory, it depends on growing its imports and exports, expanding its infrastructure, and building affordable housing. The overwhelming majority of the food we eat here is imported. The economy isn't much dependent on agriculture or on natural resource extraction. The war has of course been very tough on the economy, and has especially hit the housing construction sector very hard. There's plenty of discussion to be had about the relative role of security concerns, nationalism, religion, political polarization etc. in shaping Israel's policy here but I just don't think there's an economic logic dictating that Israel stands to benefit by trying to absorb the West Bank into itself.
> An opinion poll from January this year showed that only a yaw-dropping 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thought the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza. The option of not launching an operation at all was not even on the ballot.
The 3.2% of Jewish Israelis thinking the armed forces used too much force in its operation in Gaza is לסת-dropping until you realize that Israel is basically the Western version of Iran. And I see you are already making this connection yourself:
> Jewish Israel might very well vanquish the Palestinians. But doing so, they run the risk of becoming more and more like the Arabs themselves.
People have a tendency to exaggerate the degree to which their friends (and spouses) are similar to them. Westerners look back on Hellenic Greece as a similar sort of society to our own, and gloss over the pederasty and bestiality, and the low position of women which was much more typical of nations in the Middle East. White Americans also have a tendency to see characters in Japanese anime as white, regardless of their intended ethnicity. The same thing is going on with Israel. The Israelis may not be typical of Middle Easterners, but whatever their origins and wherever their funding comes from, a Middle Eastern nation is what they are, and America should stop subsidizing their bloodthirsty wars.
>> doing so, they run the risk of becoming more and more like the Arabs themselves.
I somewhat agree with this, though not in the negative sense that you put it.
I don't think the future of Haredim in Israel is authoritarianism. I don't believe in religious coercion, and I sincerely hope that as Haredim adjust to the challenges of running a country they will recognize this. I certainly don’t believe that the Haredim will be add significantly more religious coercion than the current status quo. (Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the lack of public transportation on Saturday is not a new phenomenon.)
However, I do feel that even with zero religious coercion a Haredi majority country will be "more and more like the Arabs themselves". I believe this is a key component in making peace with the Arabs.
Tove once pointed out to me that Sweden has a first world government, economy, and education system, yet they have not managed to deradicalize their Arabs. I refrained from sharing my thoughts then, but I will mention them now.
My theory is that the Arabs don't do well in a modern liberal society without traditional values, with in-your-face capitalism, stiff competition and where sexuality is commodified and paraded in the streets and online.
The first modern pogrom in Israel was in 1929. Why was this? Because the Western European Zionists promoted in-your-face capitalism and militarism and the Arabs felt extremely demeaned and even threatened by it.
You write about the extremism of no public transportation on Saturday. I am not promoting such a policy. I don't promote any religious coercion. However, I wonder if you have ever considered the benefits to mental health and to family life of having one day every week when peace and quiet descend upon a bustling city. Such experiences lead one to wonder if a society with more emphasis on traditional values is more healthy and more conducive to promoting peace.
In conclusion, I acknowledge that much of this is speculative. However, the Israeli experience and especially the Haredi experience is a unique experiment of how a high fertility society can survive in the modern age. I think we should all do our best to judge this experiment favorably.
Anders and I have discussed one thing several times, at least half seriously: Will the ongoing development of Haredim of Israel influence the nature/nurture debate?
From an outside perspective, the Haredim look more or less as backward as the Arabs. They do little of what modern economists predict leads to prosperity. But, as far as I understand, they have a lot of one thing: IQ.
Will that make the difference that makes the Haredim succeed where other tradional-minded peoples stagnate? I can't rule it out. It will be hugely interesting to see more of it.
> But, as far as I understand, they have a lot of one thing: IQ.
Really? I've never encountered this claim before. The Amish don't score as well as mainstream Americans, and it's hard to see why the Haredim would do well, especially given that most of them aren't Ashkenazi.
According to Wikipedia the haredim are mostly Ashkenazi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haredi Judaism
Must be difficult to IQ test the Amish, since they only attend school until 14 and speak English as a foreign language. But it would be strange if their ban on higher education didn't deter some of their brainiest specimen.
Ah, your wikipedia skills are good! I checked that article before posting and came away with the impression it was a mix of Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Mizrahi Jews.
As for the IQ of the Amish, it's been tested a few times, mostly by people sympathetic to them and quick to dismiss their lower-than-mainstream scores as a result of cultural bias in the tests. My personal impression of the Amish is that they are classic religious conservatives: humble, patient, prosocial, unimaginative, and unintelligent.
I've never met a Haredim, but they look similar, being the poorest, most prolific, and least educated of all Jewish groups in the US: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/08/26/a-portrait-of-american-orthodox-jews/
I don't think it's just IQ. They also have going for them their strong connections to Haredim and other Orthodox Jews around the world. They are one family and they will evolve together.
>> Even more interesting than politics is the cultural and social aspects. Haredi are poorer and more religious than the average Israeli etc.
This is the punchline of the article, and it is the part that bothers me the most. I very much appreciate this blog because it takes a strong stand against modern Malthusian philosophy. Your strong push for pro-natalism conveys your feelings that more fertility will stimulate more innovation and growth which will overcome the current challenges which humanity now faces. Yet when it comes to Haredim you project the classic modern Malthusian fears.
If today Haredim today are poorer it doesn't follow that the Haredim of tomorrow will bankrupt the country. Haredim of today are poor because they follow a policy of isolationism from the rest of the country. If you want to see what Haredim of tomorrow will look like take a look at Lakewood, NJ. This is the community most similar to the Israeli Haredim. They prioritize Talmud study above all. The elite high schools for the brightest male students have no secular studies whatsoever. Most men continue to study Talmud full time at least a few years after marriage. Yet they manage to support over 50,000 students in private school, saving the government well over half a billion dollars per year. Most households in which the householder is over 40 earn a six-digit income, and a large number earn over $200,000 annually. I don't see why the future Haredim of Israel should be any different. Until now, their isolationism (especially their refusal to serve in the army) prevented them from fully participating in society and the economy, but that is changing already, and it will continue to change as they continue to take over the country.
Additionally, I have never seen proof that Haredim are currently a net burden on the economy. Some points to consider: 1. Some of their lower income is due to their lower average age. 2. They consume far less per capita. 3. Their study halls attract much foreign income, whether in the form of Haredi tourism from abroad, Haredi students from abroad, or simply financial support from admirers across the world. The budgets of many Haredi institutions, especially those for adults, are covered mostly by foreign donations. There probably are more points to make that I am unaware of.
Lakewood is actually very interesting. I tried to make Google explain the economy of Lakewood to me, but I do not know if I got any wiser. My best guess, which is not very good, is that Lakewood makes its money from Jewish tourism and export of Jewish paraphernalia. Exactly how that can generate a high-income economy is unclear to me. Maybe you can shed some light in this area.
To a secular observer it is very strange indeed how lots of people without any secular education can take a place among the top tenth income bracket. Jews are of course famous for their high IQ, which should help, but for most high-income careers (physician, lawyer et cetera) you still need a secular education to start climbing the ladder.
Yes. It is indeed very interesting. I live in Lakewood and I still don't know the full answer! I am still youngish and have time to learn. I would add that the average income in the Orthodox Lakewood community is actually higher than it seems at first glance.
I don't think there is one specific answer. There is very little Jewish tourism in Lakewood. It isn't Israel. And the export of Jewish paraphernalia is not a major business.
I think the intensive study of Talmud together with the high level of responsibility inherent in a high-fertility society teaches people to adapt quickly to whatever life brings them. When it is time for people to find a career, they learn the ropes quickly. There isn't a high percentage of physicians and lawyers, mainly because the training for these professions is hard for a parent of a large family, as your wife complains. Many are in finance or tech. Accounting courses for those in the high 20s are popular and the Lakewood graduates pass the tests fairly easily. From there they often build their way up.
This is just for starters. I don't know the particulars as it varies greatly.
I am not promoting no secular studies in high school. I am merely noting that people in Lakewood don't find it necessary, and that Haredim in general are good at adapting to every situation, which is how they managed such extraordinary growth after the community was almost obliterated. If Haredim would feel that the time has come that they must teach more STEM subjects to children, they will do it.
Come to think of it, the physician career is an excellent example of the Lakewood community adapting to the times.
As I mentioned, it is hard for parents of large families to obtain a full physician degree. 10 years ago, the offices of pediatricians in Lakewood were constantly overbooked due to the fast growth and lack of corresponding growth in the number of physicians. However, recently the U.S. government has been pushing strongly for the use of physician assistants (PAs) and urgent cares. These days every pediatrician has PAs on staff, and every neighborhood has an urgent care. These urgent cares seem to be open constantly and process their patients very quickly. How much do these PAs earn? Will it be enough as their family grows? I don't know. I assume they work hard and utilize well the extra time and lower expense of a PA degree vs. that of a doctor.
(Nursing careers have also become very popular recently, especially among women.)
Another point I probably should correct is that Lakewood is somewhat similar to Israel in that many students come from all over the world to Lakewood to study Talmud, and the scholars of Lakewood teach to people in many places, in various ways. However, I think this is explains only a fraction of the Lakewood finance, though I guess it can explain much of the lack of secular studies in elite boys high schools, as these boys have a high chance of spending their life teaching Talmud.
One last point. Jews benefit not just from a high IQ, but also from an advantage in networking. This is especially relevant in Ultra-Orthodox communities, due to their large extended families, their close-nit communities and the large amount of time they spend together daily at synagogue.
>>One last point. Jews benefit not just from a high IQ, but also from an advantage in networking. This is especially relevant in Ultra-Orthodox communities, due to their large extended families, their close-nit communities and the large amount of time they spend together daily at synagogue.
Having large extended families, close-knit communities and men spending a large amount of time socializing with each other is a formula almost older than the human race itself. It is occurs across the entire Third World. But when Jews are doing it, you don't become the Third World. You become prosperous. So probably you have found a smarter way of doing it.
In case it wasn't clear, my point was that Jews always excelled at commerce and banking due to the fact that the level of trust and camaraderie that existed among Jews throughout the civilized world (wherever they were allowed to live) was very high. I don’t know to what extent this still exists among modern Jews but among Orthodox Jews it is stronger than ever.
Your comparison to Third-world societies gives me the sense that you don't fully grasp the extent of what close-nit means among the Haredi communities. Let me share a bit.
Every Haredi community has a long list of free loan organizations, for everything from the most mundane to long term loans of tens of thousands of dollars without interest or collateral. (All they ask for is Here is a partial list
Every hospital near a Haredi community has a society for visiting the sick and taking care of their needs. During Covid the hospitals had very strict visitation rules, often not allowing any visitors at all. These rules stretched out long after the other rules were canceled. Who brought the NY hospitals to change? The Ultra-Orthodox waged a campaign, which included ads in the NY Times. Why? Because they understand the importance of it. When a family member is sick, they will make shifts to ensure that they are not left alone in the hospital for a moment. Aside from this campaign, they also set up an organization (Well-Tab) which provides video monitors to place at the hospital bed.
Every large Ultra-Orthodox community has volunteer first responders, including paramedics, doctors for consultation, ambulances and even aircraft with a record response time to any medical emergency.
It is fairly common for young healthy individuals to donate a kidney to a perfect stranger.
Large communities have organizations that will come assist with anything from roadside assistance to finding a lost diamond ring. Even without any organizations, a Jew stuck on the side of the road anywhere near an Orthodox community can expect that someone will pull over to offer assistance.
There are organizations to help women on bedrest, women who had a loss of pregnancy, families who lost a child, families with a member hospitalized, families with many small children, single parents, orphaned children, couples struggling to have children etc. For children with special needs Lakewood has not only their own public school established by the Orthodox community, but also a large Center for after school, Sundays etc. And on the Sabbath and holidays teenage girls will come to your house to take these children out and entertain them. Families with young children or with other special needs have teenage girls come to their house in the evenings at no charge, girls who they never met before and may never meet again. There is a sleep-away summer camp for children with special needs (Camp Schi) and another one for children with cancer (Camp Simcha).
Most of these organizations are not affiliated with any religious body. They are run by regular "simple" individuals.
In case you want to do further research, I compiled a list of links for some of the organizations referenced. Hopefully that will be enough to get you started. https://www.lrbcol.org/ https://www.bikurcholimcleveland.org/https://bikkurcholimphilly.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikur_cholimhttps://mishpacha.com/hatzolah-of-central-jersey/ Chesed Organization Directory - Find Chesed Organizations - ChesedSpot https://www.boneiolam.org/ https://www.atime.org/ https://www.rccscancer.org/ https://www.thecenternj.org/ https://chaveirim.org/about/ https://www.chailifeline.org/ YL Hearts https://misameach.org/about/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ HatzalahHome - Sister to Sister Network Hatzolah Air: Emergency Response Team (hatzolair.org) https://www.chesedmatch.org/united-states-of-america/new-jersey/lakewood/gemach https://www.chailifeline.org/ Renewal https://misameach.org/about/ Aryeh's Special Smile (aryehsspecialsmile.org) Agudah Ukraine Crisis Fund (charidy.com) Tomchei Shabbos - Tomchei Shabbos Tomche Shabbos (Tomchei Shabbos) Of Rockland County About us - tomchei tzedaka corp Camp Simcha and Camp Simcha Special
This is just a taste. Perhaps all this is just normal Third World activities, especially in communities which are "less civic-minded". I don't know. I haven't studied other societies much.
>>Perhaps all this is just normal Third World activities, especially in communities which are "less civic-minded".
Nope. It is clearly not normal Third World activities. I know a person who built a house in Guatemala. He hired a friend to deliver concrete to the roof terrace. The friend delivered most of the concrete. But some he pilfered away to another construction site, so the roof started to leak after a few months. That is the Third World! People can trust each other so little that they can't do much much business at all.
All over the Third World, there seem to be attempts at remedying this state of things. People build mosques and churches. Muslims organize Quran schools. Superficially, to an outsider, it looks a lot like they are trying to do what Orthodox Jews are doing. Even the gender structure tends to be the same: Women busy themselves with everyday subsistence, men focus more or building the bigger community. And still, Orthodox Jews are thriving while the Third World remains poor and desorganized.
I realize there must be some secret sauce among the Jews that is difficult for other peoples to make. I would really like to search a bit deeper for the recipe. Because for an outsider, it is not obvious what sets the Ultra-Orthodox Jews apart from other traditionalist populations, except high IQ. I can se that the Ultra-Orthodox Jews succeed in building community where others are failing, but I can't clearly grasp why.
Edit: By the way, I looked at this link you posted https://www.adireihatorah.com/about
and watched the... music video. Highly intriguing. I really wonder what those men are discussing.
I think what you are saying is very interesting on a general plan. For a long time I have suspected that higher education is mainly a way to drill young people in cultural values in general - not to specifically prepare them for the labor market. What you are saying strongly supports that suspicion.
At what age, approximately, do Jewish men in Lakewood start to work for a living? Who provides for them, and their families, before that happens?
>>At what age, approximately, do Jewish men in Lakewood start to work for a living?
There is no single answer. Every individual is different.
>>Who provides for them, and their families, before that happens?
Same as above. However, the main 3 factors are (a) the women work hard (yet, as I've mentioned before studies show that they are very happy), (b) the parents often give some some financial support for the first (5?) years (this is part of the reason why so many older households earn well over 200k annually), (c) see here https://www.adireihatorah.com/about
In any case, I find this intriguing. What you are saying is, more or less, that there is a people who
1. Explicitly focus their community on something else than earning money and
2. nonetheless, earn a lot of money
This should be extremely interesting for everyone who cares about fertility. Mainstream Westerners are so busy producing stuff that we don't have the time to have children. You describe a subculture where young people are actively discouraged from investing all they have in getting good jobs, and nonetheless they are doing fine on a financial level. If the secular majority can copy that, our civilization is not doomed after all.
Thank you.
This is exactly the point I am trying to bring out, that for those who see low fertility as a problem they should be looking at Haredi society as an extremely important experiment. Certainly they have what to improve, but we should be rooting for their success.
Thank you very much. This is really very interesting.
It also squares well with the old adage that it does not matter very much what you do as long as you are very good at it. What surprises me a bit is that people with large families have time for the sort of obsession that is usually required to succeed outside of the formal channels.
Since you specifically mention finance, I must also ask: I assume there is a lot of migration between Lakewood and New York City. Could some (or a lot) of Lakewood's financial industry be sort of outsourced New York finance? If so, it is kind of hard to replicate. Most people, myself included, do not live 90 minutes from the world's premier financial center.
This article gives a sense of what the Lakewood economy was like 2 years ago.
https://mishpacha.com/boomtown-hits-a-bump/
Thank you for the link. The article was informative but the rest of the paper looks even more so. I had never heard about Mispacha before, but it looks really interesting.
Oh, sorry. I guess I should have shared more.
Here are some more sites https://hamodia.com/ https://amimagazine.org/ https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/ https://matzav.com/ https://thevoiceoflakewood.com/issues/ https://bpweekly.com/issues/ (The last is just ads but if you have the time to flip through it can be informative.)
There really is nothing 'hidden' about the American Ultra-Orthodox community. Almost every genre of literature is available in Orthodox form. I even saw an Orthodox Sherlock Holmes book recently (if Sherlock Holmes was an Orthodox Jewish woman) and here is a book review of Rob Henderson from an Orthodox (not Ultra) Jewish perspective https://parshawithchana.substack.com/p/on-troubled-kids-jewish-law-the-military?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
If anything, the problem is that there is too much info, and it may be hard to sift through and get to the root of their culture. I think the hardest part of analyzing the Haredim is the temptation to take things out of context and view them from a secular perspective when in reality the larger picture changes things drastically.
If I may, I would note one example, which is feminism. To the outsider it may appear that we treat our women similar to the way Arabs do. However, that view ignores the strong inhibitions we place upon our men. I believe that most Ultra-Orthodox women view themself as far more liberated than secular women and as lucky to live in a society where men behave this way. The restrictions on them may be hard, perhaps too harsh, but they feel it is worth it. Understandably, this may be hard for secular society to relate to, but growing up in Orthodox society creates a different mindset.
I don't know if this is the best example, but hopefully you will understand my point. If you have more questions I am available.
Yes. To a large extent Lakewood is a suburb of NY. However, in recent years Lakewood has become a center of its own. Many large office buildings have been built in the last decade. Most of the younger generation does not commute to NY.
>> Most of the younger generation does not commute to NY.
I think it is more accurate to say that hardly anyone in the younger generation commutes to NY.
>> Why would anyone want war over peace? Religious and historical aspects aside, there is an obvious explanation: demography. Israel is severely lacking in land and its population is growing rapidly.
Yuval already explained that this is not the right answer. The reason for the settlements is not a lack of land but rather (a) religious messianism (which Haredim oppose), (b) the feeling that a Jewish presence in these areas is important for security, (c) a conviction that a 2 or 3 state solution is impractical (mostly for security reasons) and must be prevented.
On the question of the rationality of the war I don't dare to think that I know enough to form an opinion. However, it does seem possible that if Israel had shown weakness, they would have exposed themselves to the risk of subsequent attacks which may be much worse, especially if they come for Hezbollah. Is there any real hope of "making the Arabs less angry"? I have never seen a clear path to this, without giving them full citizenship and freedom of movement throughout Israel.
Neither Iran nor any of its proxies or affiliates ever showed any interest in developing a real peace with Israel.
Additionally, the idea of telling Israelis not to retaliate flies in the face of everything Zionism stands for. Zionism was established by people who wanted to rectify thousands of years of being told they can't stick up for themselves.
I think it is relevant to note that this recalls the debate between Haredim and Zionists regarding who was negligent during the Holocaust. The Zionists accuse the victims of not standing up for themselves, though there is no evidence that standing up for themselves would have saved them. The Haredim accuse the Zionists of blocking attempts to bribe Nazis, despite the evidence that Jews were saved this way.
If placating the Arabs will not work can there possibly be any long-term solution?
I believe the only long-term solution is to overwhelm the Arabs demographically. This is possible, as the Arab fertility rate is plunging https://www.palquest.org/en/chart/14380/demography-and-palestine-question-ii-fertility-rate - fertility rate. If there are enough Jews in Israel, Gaza can be annexed to Israel and its residents can be offered full Israeli citizenship. Their schools and streets will be controlled by Israel and the populace deradicalized.
I have been thinking about this for the last few days. I would love to fully respond. However, I don't have the time to do it justice. Additionally, I don't live in Israel, and I don't follow the details of Israeli news. I feel especially uncomfortable debating Yuval as he is living through this.
I would like to make a few comments though.
>> These parties are almost always adherents of a militarily strong Israel and avid supporters of West Bank settlements.
Is this true? See this post https://tamritz.substack.com/p/use-ultra-orthodox-theology-to-save. She is pretty accurate. Rabbi Shach, one of the most influential Charedi rabbis ever (he established the Litvishe faction of Agudas Yisroel, was influential in the establishment of Shas, and was the "leader of the yeshivos"), strongly opposed the pushback against land for peace. The only "settlement" he allowed his followers to live in was Modiin Ilit, and even that permission came extremely reluctantly, as the establishment left no other option.
It is hard for me to understand how a community which barely serves in the military can be depicted as "almost always adherents of a militarily strong Israel". Clearly, they identify with the right only because the right respects their religion.
The religious community whose followers are adherents of a militarily strong Israel and avid supporters of West Bank settlements is heavily overrepresented on the front line. Approximately half of the casualties among Israeli soldiers in the war grew up in a DL (Dati Leumi=National Religious) community. But they are not Haredi.
Thousands of educated Westernera living in America or Israel know as much as I do if not more. If someone had a specific question, I'd probably try to answer it for them.
Most people (especially those promoting their writing & ideas online) aren't interested in facts that don't conform to their ideas.
Do you think that the world needs more people talking/writing about Israel? Especially people who begin by reciting their cred ("I have five siblings living in Israel "; "I spent two summers working on a Kibbutz", "I once worked with Bibi's former dog walker") before pontificating.
What I like about this blog is the dispassionate and rational discussion of how peoples work (e.g., in a mechanistic way).
I think Israel is interesting in this way because you can actually see how things work in the real-time. I am of course very emotionally invested here, so it's a challenge...
>>Do you think that the world needs more people talking/writing about Israel? Especially people who begin by reciting their cred ("I have five siblings living in Israel "; "I spent two summers working on a Kibbutz", "I once worked with Bibi's former dog walker") before pontificating.
I definitely think so. As things are, most people who write about Israel and the Palestinians in English do it as a practice in moral philosophy. They use the formula "if x is true, is x then morally justifiable according to us Westerners?" The central question for most debaters seems to be "what should a good Westerner think?" Not "what is actually happening?" I think the latter question is much more interesting. And to get more answers to that question, we need people who know something more than what is already in the English-language newspapers.
It's definitely not because of shortage of land. The Negev area is a third of Israel and is very sparsely populated. The whole north edge of Israel has been evacuated since the start of the war, with no return date.
The ultra-right ultra-religious jewish-supremacy sects have a "The Whole Land of Israel" concept, where it is God's will that the jews will control all of the biblical land of Israel (yes, yes, from the river to the sea). Add to that the deep enmity and racism towards arabs and that's why the contested areas are the West Bank and Gaza, even though larger and better unpopulated areas exist.
If you ask what got us here, I think it all originated in several "original sins" that were never addressed:
1. What does a "jewish state" means? I believe the "founding fathers" meant that it will be a place for the people who identify as jews, and/or are jewish by ethnicity. That's how Israel was mostly secular and liberal. But then came the religious people and took ownership of judaism as a religion. In addition, the ultra-orthodox sect, which was a very small minority, somehow got into law that they are the only "official" sect of judaism here - they are the only ones allowed to marry and bury, for example. Add to this the rapid growth and not contributing either financially or in the military and you get to a very bad place after a few decades.
We saw this coming many many years, but did nothing about it, for a variety of reasons.
2. Even since before WW1, the relationship between the new jewish immigrants and the native arab population were deteriorating. When Israel was established, we had a big war with all the neighboring Arab states.
We then learned to "live by the sword" and started to hate Arabs. During the 6 day war we conquered Gaza and the West Bank (which I believe was done primarily due to "security reasons", but maybe that's a rationalization) and the The Occupation started.
There's a slogan in the left here that "The Occupation Corrupts", and that's exactly what happened.
We can discuss the mechanics of how any occupation corrupts since the dawn of time (e.g., The Spartans), but the fact remains that Israel became more racist and militant, with the religious right becoming right-on "white supremacists".
3. Because we couldn't agree on it at the beginning, Israel has no Constitution. That means that the political system here was always fragile.
4. A more prosaic evil, of a corrupt and manipulative populist coming to power and keeping it for too long, destroying strong opposition and surronding himself with opportunits and corrupt people, who lett all those issues fester for too long.
As a (as I understand it) secular Israeli, how do you think of the future for you and your children? Is emigration on the table or do you see a manageable future in Israel? Do you think the more religious and nationalist and the more secular and more typically Western-minded will learn to get along?
I am very pessimistic about our future here.
We were going in a bad direction for a long while (e.g., the Elor Azaria incident, when a soldier executed a prisoner and many prominent Rabbis and political leaders cheered him on), but since the last elections we are in a sharp fall, that is now clear to all.
Rubi Rivlin, the former president of Israel had a speech about the "four tribes" in Israel - the secular jews, the zionist-religious jews (which include the settlers), the Charedi jews and the arabs.
Demographically we are nearing the point where these four tribes will be about the same size.
In his speech he urged us to learn to integrate and live together, but this is not the current trend.
At the very best, it would be possible to live side-by-side, but realistically there are many points of contention between any two tribes.
From a moral perspective it is already very difficult for me here. I definitely feel we are "the bad guys" (even if there are other bad guys around).
From a personal safety perspective, it is becoming much more dangerous here. I dread the day when my son will need to enlist into the army (which is mandatory).
From an economic perspective, it has been OK here up till now, but this is already starting to change for the worst.
So in sum - yes, I very much want to emigrate. This is a subject that is constantly talked about and many families are already leaving.
It is hard because we built our lifes here, and we suspect that life as emigres will be hard for us (but maybe better for the children). My wife especially is resistant to the idea.
I tell myself that events in the near future will force our hand in any case.
As to where to go, I don't know. I hear that Sweden is very beautiful this time of year :)
When in the Middle East, you don't have to search for bad guys for long. Or in most corners of the world, actually, except the thankfully (still) very protected West.
Sweden is very beautiful, at least parts of it. And even better, there is beautiful land for sale rather cheaply. Still, I think there are better alternatives. The West as a whole is in decline, but the decline still seems worse in Sweden than in its neighbors. Lawlessness and criminal gangs is one problem. Excessive state oppression against decent citizens is, in my opinion, an even worse problem. Right now there is some kind of discussion in Sweden about the extremely rigid school attendance laws. Or not a discussion really. Mostly it is monologues held by teachers and politicians about why everyone child must attend their great child prison (weirdly, they sometimes say that the reason is that the children learn so little). I think both Denmark, Norway and Finland are a bit more sane, but that could be because I don't get the subtle absurdities of their duck ponds.
Also, looking explicitly Jewish is out of the question in Sweden due to Arabs who don't like Jews, but I guess you aren't visibly Jewish anyway.
If you like cities, I think Copenhagen is a nice one. And if you like beautiful countryside in the middle of nowhere, the Danish isle of Bornholm is a hit. But ask someone Danish at first, they might have dark secrets that I don't see.
>>Also, looking explicitly Jewish is out of the question in Sweden due to Arabs who don't like Jews.
Is this clearly documented? Has this been the case even before November '23?
If so, why does Anders feel that we can simply make the Arabs "less angry?
(I guess the last question is for Anders)
Yes, Jews in Sweden, and especially in the southern city of Malmö, have complained over security issues for a number of years now:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/anti-semitism-in-malm%C3%B6-reveals-flaws-in-swedish-immigration-system-1.3080484
To your excellent points I just want to add the factor of intra-Jewish racism. Israel was founded by European Jews, who then took in large numbers of Oriental Jews to populate the new country. The Europeans believed they would continue ruling due to their innate superiorness. But this did not happen. And ever since the Likud victory in 1977 the secular, European Jews have been fighting a rear-guard action to preserve as much as possible of the secular, liberal, European state they once founded.
This definitely exists. Personally I wouldn't call it "racism" as it seems to me of a class/tribe kind of thing, but you are correct that Netanyahu somehow became (probably inherited from Begin) the champion of fighting against the discrimination of the founding generation. The fact that his policies are even worse for his constituents is one of those ironies common in history.
As an Israeli, representing only my opinions and worldviews, I think most of what said here is accurate enough.
IMHO, though, I think the "real story" of the recent precipitous decline of Israel is the coup by Netanyahu.
Israel's current government is comically inept. The Oct. 7th massacre never would've happened if there were even semi-decent people in office, not to mention all the horrific mistakes done since.
The Haredis and other ultra-religious and/or fanatic groups are a real threat to the continuing existance of Israel (which cannot survive without the liberal economy) but we had many decades to deal with these thereats, and to continue to peace talks with the palestinians, if Bibi would not have ruled for so long and only let everything fester.
I have always felt that Israel's political problems arise from the ultra low threshold for party representation(wikipedia tells me it has progressively risen to 3.25% of the vote, but I think 5% or even 7.5% would be better) for political party representation in parliament (the Knesset), but no doubt that is a simplification.
I lived in both Israel and Syria back in the '70s. I've been impressed by Israel's political stability given the scale and diversity of peoples that have become citizens since then.
I'm not an expert in the dynamics caused by these changes, but the general sentiment in my Twitter feed is that the latest downward spiral was actually accelerated when the threshold was raised.
This led to more "blockish" behavior, where all the parties vote together and there is less chance for dissent from individual MPs.
That's intuitive ie the raised %age increases the power of parties over individual MPs. From my perspective more 'blockish' behaviour does tend to suppress extremes and leads to more reliable implementation of policy programmes. However, there have been plenty of times when I have personally disagreed with a policy programme in which case I just have to wait until the next election to express my disagreement.
Maybe too a better functioning government would mean that the Courts would be less inclined to rule on law, though even our (NZ) rather new and polite Supreme Court is somewhat inclined to. ie the NZ government has rewritten law when it has not accepted an interpretation by the Courts. Though without international furore seen when Israel does it.
I do not know enough about Israeli politics to know if Netanyahu's rule can truthfully be described as a coup. From my vantage point it looks more like Netanyahu is a shrewd political operator. Probably too shrewd. To continue my other comment it looks as Netanyahu is a secular European Jew who has opportunistically allied with religious Oriental Jews. Maybe Netanyahu is exploiting the Mizrahi votes to stay in power. Or maybe the Mizrahi voters are using Netanyahu to rearrange the board without having to do the dirty work themselves. Who will turn out on top is difficult to say (at least for me).
Thinking all of this over, it feels to me Israel is a novel experiment.
A purposefully constructed nation state comprised of different peoples, the great majority of which are immigrants, is not something I think has been tried before.
As an engineer, I know firsthand the folly of trying to construct a "solution" to a very complicated problem that will survive for many years.
Maybe the USA is the closest example, but it of course has many significant changes (and maybe it is also suffering in similar ways).
I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
> I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
Humans always find reasons to divide into groups. I know of a person who was refused at a shop in Stockholm in the 1960-ies because her accent identified her as a person from the southern-most part of Sweden. She was told "we don't serve your kind here". Ironically nowadays Swedish nationalism seems to have its strongest support in the southern-most part of Sweden. The major groups have shifted.
https://www.gamereactor.se/blog/pajman+1337/139139/Grav+bort+skane/
That battle was still going on fifteen years ago.
>>I wonder how it feels like to live in a "normal" nation state, one which has been created from the mostly-homogenous people already living there.
It feels suffocating! I guess that is the nature of human society: it is not completely pleasant anywhere. That is one reason to apply a coldly rational approach: Living in a society always feels a bit unpleasant. The sport is to avoid the ones heading for worse disaster than the rest.
In your opinion: Why are some Israeli groups so eager to grab Palestinian land? Is there a tangible shortage of land that makes people invent excuses? Why is settling the West Bank considered to be such a good idea in parts of Israeli society?
I accidentally answered not as a reply.
And another one did too, it seems, so I started to suspect some system error.
It's just that the UI when opening the link to a specific comment is misleading.
As a huge fan of your & your wife's writings, I'm genuinely sorry to say that this essay bungles basic sociological/societal facts.
I'm an American Orthodox Jew with five siblings living in Israel . This article is absurd.
You blur together Litvish, Chassidic, Lubavitch, & Sefardi Chareidim with Nationalist Chardal settlers and traditional religious Zionists.
Your understanding of the Chareidi exemption (P'Tur) from Army service is weak at best and your grasp of the evolving Chareidi relationships with the State (Medinah) & Zionism is severely lacking.
I recommend that next time you write on this topic have someone with greater knowledge of the situation.
I thought it was a pretty good representation of what a lot of western non-jews are seeing in the Israeli war in gaza. Sometimes knowing the details about the trees can obscure the outline of the forest they form.
I am the first to admit that my knowledge of Orthodox Jews is rudimentary at best. I do find them very interesting, and I hope to learn more, but I still have some way to go. For this particular article I do not think my ignorance is a fatal flaw. I do treat Haredis as a solid block, which they clearly are not, but I do believe I have got the general characteristics about right. My assumptions are of course based on the current situation. And the internal dynamics of the Haredi community may change circumstances in ways that are unexpected to me. Since the internet never forgets I expect to have plenty of time to make excuses for this when it actually happens.
Read the Wikipedia entry on Shas? They are a Chareidi Mizrachi political/social/educational organization whose members often served in the army.
You also miss the point that the Yeshiva student exemptions means that Chareidi men can't legally get jobs until they are older & married because they are officially learning in Yeshiva..
A major reason to change the system is to get more Chareidim into the workforce.
The Mizrachi jews also don't serve in the army as a rule.
There was indeed more of them then the Ashkenazi but in absolute numbers both are negligible, and in recent years it has been even less for all Haredi's.
As for the law - this law has been proposed and is strongly defended by the Charedi leadership.
This essentially "locks" the young Charedi men in the Yeshivas for many years, leaving them at the mercy of the leadership to provide for them (since they mush "study" in a formal Yeshiva to not go to the army).
The last government, which had no Charedis, actually tried to lower the age at which Charedi's are exempt from service to get them to go to work (since getting them to join the army was considered a lost cause at that point).
>>I'm an American Orthodox Jew with five siblings living in Israel . This article is absurd.
You blur together Litvish, Chassidic, Lubavitch, & Sefardi Chareidim with Nationalist Chardal settlers and traditional religious Zionists.
Your understanding of the Chareidi exemption (P'Tur) from Army service is weak at best and your grasp of the evolving Chareidi relationships with the State (Medinah) & Zionism is severely lacking.
/
I can speak for both Anders and me when I'm saying our knowledge of traditional religious groups like Orthodox Jews does not match our interest. It is actually my fault that the above post is not called "Ramblings about Israel and the Gaza War" (I thought it was no more rambling than the average Substack post on the issue, of which there are many).
The linguistic and cultural barriers are a problem for us. Israel clearly is a world of its own and we know that, as outsiders, we only get a glimpse. If you, or anybody else who reads this, would volunteer as an Israel consultant we would be very grateful.
As an Israeli (secular and liberal) who is currently very interested and horrified by what is going on, I can provide my opinions :)
I know little about the actual situation in Israel right now but thought the essay provided depth, context and understanding that I had otherwise not been aware of (I had not known, for instance, that there are Israeli military units specifically designed to be compatible for traditional religious Jews).
Based on the facts, as presented, I found the essay persuasive. However, I do not really know the facts, let alone additional relevant factors that may underlie them. What corrections would you offer to the essay, beyond the general assertion that it was lacking?
If I had the time to write a proper list of corrections, I might consider it, even though I strenuously try to avoid writing about Israel. But I don't.
If you don't even know that there have been Yeshivot built around Army service for over 50 years, how do you expect to grasp the complicated situation around army service & religion
One clear observation I made from the essay was that the religious exemptions Israel offers some communities are not sustainable and likely soon to end.
Is that a realistic understanding of the current situation?
I've deliberately made it a yes/no question, though would of course also be interested in a longer answer.
I know that if I was in the Israeli army now, I'd be doing my best while very unhappy about how I was still there now. I'd also no longer be on the fence about religious exemptions for military service. I'd be like 'Fight by my side or leave, anything else risks Israel itself'. I'd be clear and relentless about that, in exactly the kind of way I've seen Israelis behave in other situations (to their credit, and my admiration).
No. (That's my answer.)
The media & the Street has been talking about getting rid of Chareidi/Ultra-Orthodox religious exemptions for at least 40 years.
[I could go on for a lot longer (& almost did before hitting backspace).
Just one question: What do you think would happen if Israel were to suddenly abolish all exemptions for Yeshiva students?
As an outsider I suggest that if Israeli society is as fractured as has been suggested in the comments here:
"Rubi Rivlin, the former president of Israel had a speech about the "four tribes" in Israel - the secular jews, the zionist-religious jews (which include the settlers), the Charedi jews and the arabs."
Then probably no one tribe holds moral authority and it will come down to who holds the economic power and whether they and an elected abolitionist government act in concert.
In this case there would be howls of outrage, but words are merely hot air easily swept aide by the determined, and (most) Yeshiva students would serve in the army
I'm trying to take you seriously.
How many Chareidim do you know in real life?
How many protests at Rechov Bar Ilan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar-Ilan_Street) have you witnessed?
E.g. families with 7-12 children without Internet or any secular literature at home. Where any contact between unrelated men & women is strictly forbidden. Whose religion is central to their existences & identities.
Joining Tzahal would be a death blow to their religiousity as individuals & communally.
It could easily be formulated as *Yaharog ve-Lo Yaavor* (sins which require martyrdom before violating).
If you think that the majority of Chareidim & their Gedolim (Rabbinic leadership) will just follow a law & have Yeshiva students join the army then this conversation is silly.
>>even though I strenuously try to avoid writing about Israel
May I ask why? You know things that most mainstream Westerners don't know and you know how to speak to mainstream Westerners. The world depends on people like you for the transfer of knowledge from one group of people to another.
in Israel. Or changes in Chareidi society over the last 25 years.
In Israel so maybe through your siblings.
"Why would anyone want war over peace? Religious and historical aspects aside, there is an obvious explanation: demography. Israel is severely lacking in land and its population is growing rapidly. The classic solution to that problem is to encroach on your neighbors land. Something Israel has been doing more or less since its inception. "
It's true that Israel is very small but I don't think the amount of land is the main issue. Lack of land or resources is rarely the main cause for war, especially in modern times. And Especially not the land where Gaza is.
In any case. The game theoretical calculus is interesting. Given that Hamas would continuue to pose a threat against Israel and it's people if Israel did nothing after October 7, how could Israels government not take action to eliminate Hamas? As international bystanders we'd much like them to not have invaded Gaza and maybe just improved their defenses or done some raids, but that would be unpopular in Israel and it's hard to see any other viable path than more or less what they did. Which isn't very encouraging given how horrible that turned out.
Gaza will be a threat to Israel as long as it is populated by angry Arabs. There are only two viable solutions to that problem. The first being complete ethnic cleansing and the second being to make the Gazans less angry. At the moment Israel is doing neither, meaning that they will not solve anything. Sure, they are destroying military infrastructure in Gaza which will hamper any future attacks on Israel proper. But this infrastructure is easily rebuilt by Hamas or whoever succeeds them.
I recall a blog post from earlier this year by Richard Hanania where he made the argument that a vast majority of Gazans in particular and Palestinians in general already disliked Israel so much that even though Israel were going to be really brutal in Gaza it couldn't make Palestinians hate them much more than they already did...
The hate isn't just based on political or historical grievances of who took who's land, but on fundamentally irreconcilable religious differences with respect to the land and the people who lived there, etc. And the same goes for the Haredim and orthodox jews vis avis the Muslims.
That said, the solution can't be ethnic cleansing. But especially after the current Gaza war it's hard to see any amicable solution even though some kind of two state solution is probably the only way to go down the line
A comment on Americans being unsuccessful in their wars: I’d say the one in Afghanistan was, game theoretically speaking, a success. When a population gets attacked from outside they tend to feel strong collective anger and an urge to respond if they are strong enough. I guess it’s probably ingrained evolutionarily. After the Twin Towers attack, 88% of Americans supported the war (that’s less than Israelis today but then again, in the Twin Towers no babies were manually beheaded). The game theoretic justification for such a disproportionately strong response is of course teaching the enemy to think twice before trying such a thing next time. The emotional, natural, evolutionarily explainable meaning of the American-Afghanistan war was to show us all that one doesn’t mess with America, and this message was loud and clear. The Taliban was removed from power for almost a generation and had to restructure from a strong centrally-led organization to quasi-autonomous smaller groups. If I was a terrorist planning a large-scale attack on America, I would think quite seriously about what happened in Afghanistan. The later post-hoc justifications for the war – we are bringing them democracy, they may have an atomic bomb – were just that: post-hoc.
Supposedly the main reason for the current Gaza war is the same (as you also said): the population is angry and wants to show how it goes when you attack the children of Israel. This is simple, natural, and unpreventable; all the other explanations are just post-hoc reasoning. Humans are predictable like this; Hamas needed war, they knew the best way to get it was to go and behead some babies, rape some women, so this is what they did. The war wasn’t preventable after that. In some ways, it’s a success (loud signal re not messing with Israel), in other ways, it’s not (international standing).
This is all a bit speculative since so little of what happened is known for sure, but as far as I have understood what happened in 2001, there was a good chance that Afghanistan would have handed over the Al-Qaeda leadership to the US if they would have given it a little more time and diplomatic effort.
As it turned out now the Talibans were expelled. But their generation away from power seems to just have made them stronger. And this came at a truly astronomical cost to America.
The problem with the deterrent you are talking about is that it is capricious. Afghanistan harbored Usama bin Laden. But Usama bin Laden was not directly involved in the 9/11 attack. The attackers were mostly Saudis. And they all died in the attack, in general it is unclear what can deter a suicide attacker. They thrive on enmity, something that the American wars created in abundance.
Bin Laden was also a Saudi. Did you mean "Afghanistan harbored Usama bin Laden but was not directly involved in the 9/11 attack. The attackers were mostly Saudis" and Yemenis.
I interpreted it as Usama bin Laden just being a distant financer, which I wasn't aware of. DuckDuckGo has been down for hours and I'd rather not explore this topic on Google... Anders please enlighten us.
It was not well-known at the time, but Usama bin Laden was actually not a suspect in the 9/11 attacks. If you looked at FBI's most wanted lists back in the day (they are probably still available through some web archive service) you could see that Usama bin Laden was wanted for the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania (and maybe something else I have forgotten about) but not for 9/11. And this squares with the rest of the available information. Usama bin Laden was clearly an ideological inspiration to the 9/11 attackers. But he was not at all involved in the practical planning and, as far as I have understood it, not even one of the financiers. For the United States to start a war to get their hands on him specifically was always kind of strange.
Perhaps one other thing he was wanted for was the bomb that went off in the parking garage below one of the World Trande Center towers in the late nineties?
Thanks, interesting. I cleary remember contemporary media claiming that Usama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks. And the newspaper headline "It is done" after the special forces operation against him, suggesting closure after 9/11.
Were the attackers not members of Al-Qaeda? Or was Al-Qaeda just a franchise brand for a set of ideas, not an actual organisation?
From the neocon perspective, the wars on Iraq and Libya were entirely successful, as both these countries were turned into failed states.
Why do Neocons want failed states? Is it because it perpetuates war or because the chaos allows them to revolutionize the targeted peoples/states. I'm thinking of Peter in GoT - chaos is a ladder.
Because a failed state is no threat to Israel or the gulfie tyrannies.
Sort of like Richelieu's strategy during the 30 Years War.
I don't understand how Saddam/Iraq was a threat to Israel or Saudi Arabia. Overthrowing him made Iraq more aligned with Iran given its Shia majority, destroyed Christian communities and led to the rise of ISIS.
Need I remind you of how none other than Netanyahu went to the Congress to demand that the United States attack Iraq?
And the idea that the neocons care about the fate of the Christians of Iraq is a hoot. Since you mentioned them, the Christians, Yazidis, Zoroastrians and other communities of Iraq survived for centuries, and often thrived. They survived the Crusades, the Mongols, the Persians, Tamerlane, Tamahsp, Baibars, Murad, Saddam Hussein and many others.
They did not survive the Americans.
>>Humans are predictable like this; Hamas needed war, they knew the best way to get it was to go and behead some babies, rape some women, so this is what they did.
But imagine what power it can give a people not to be manipulable this way. Hamas made the first move. Israel just followed. The ability not to follow such simple moves gives an advantage in itself.
Yes.
I think the biggest tragedy (among many) is how predictably irrational Israelis are at this time.
The big pro-democracy demostrations simply evaporated when the war started, even though this was exactly what we warned would happen.
It seems we were indoctrinated to have a "patriotic switch" that is quite easy to turn on.
I am not one for conspiracy theories, but it does seem that a lot is going well for the current ultra-right-wing government since the war started.
> I am not one for conspiracy theories, but it does seem that a lot is going well for the current ultra-right-wing government since the war started.
I got the same impression. Preventing an attack from Hamas did not seem to align with what's best for Netanyahu.
I'm afraid that you don't even need indoctrination to react that way to a gesture like that of Hamas last autumn: could be simple human nature. And overwinning certain aspects of human nature is what has made societies successful.
Both "sides" have been making moves and counter moves for a very long time, most notably when zionist (self-admitted terrorists) ethnically cleansed large parts of what is now Israel, in the process creating Gaza in 1948 (the Nakba).
After WW1, when the Ottoman Turks (not "Arabs") lost the territory to Britian/France, zionists (or rather Jews in general) began to aggressively "colonize" Palestine when economic conditions improved. Arab/muslim grievances against the "west" are very old, but the British betrayal of Arab nationalism during the "Mandate" era (Lawrence of Arabia, etc.) increased
There is an evolutionary-archetypal cultural impedance mismatch between pastoralist gene pools (Arab/Muslim) and agrarian-industrial gene pools (the West) that exceeds any existing methods of conflict resolution, including secular-liberal western Constitutional ones (formal law, rule of law).
The basic ecological reality is that in a geopolitical and geographical (especially climatological) sense, the middle east is hostile to the outside agrarian-industrial western archetype, and favorable to the "indigenous" (pre-liberal/secular) pastoralist archetype.
But the middle east is doomed by being at the junction of some of the most important trade routes in human history, so outside meddling is inevitable, if unfortunate.
Pre-liberal culture (pastoralist archetype) is more adapted, due to its "primitive" nature, to the harsh realities of the middle east (hostile climate, historically inbred gene pool, illiteracy, poor, starving peasant societies, little or no middle class), which create a cultural "gravity well" that Israel is getting sucked down into.
Israel's survival dooms it to being a colonial outpost. As soon as it no longer serves the corrupt special interests of the Deep State/Military-Industrial-Complex, its regression to a tribalistic social form will doom it, just as the environment and history of the middle east and its trade routes doom it to perpetual war and conflict.
European Jews (whose Slavic ancestors converted during the late Roman and Byzantine empires), whose DNA has almost ZERO origin in any middle eastern gene pool, made an enormous "ecological" and cultural mistake in re-colonizing Palestine in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
They do a lot of agriculture in the Middle East. It practically got started there.
They have been doing pastoralism in the middle east for something like 15,000 years, which is why, given the geography/climate the PSYCHOLOGICAL ARCHETYPE under discussion is very deeply entrenched.
See Razib Khan's discussion (on substack).
re: They stared into the Abyss and it stared back.
The ultra zionist "far right" in Israel made very clear in the 1990s that it had no interest in a peace deal with Palestinians. A ultra zionist lunatic killed Rabin for trying to reach such a peace deal with Arafat. At that point no sane Arab would have trusted anything that the ultra zionist lunatics, including Netanyahu, said or did.
Israel has been ruled most of the time for over 20 years by doomed, insane people that are being sucked into a pre-liberal cultural gravity well.
(See Eric Weinstein's debate with Sam Harris on the Triggernometry blog, in which Weinstein tells Harris that he is "being invited into the Abyss".)
Gaza has been turned into a ghetto. The only one who benefits from this is Netanyahu, who is at least a narcissist, if not an unpoliced psychopath. So the world is stuffed until we police these monsters.
Yep, but there are no such "police". Zionist Israel is a useful colonial outpost for the (corrupt) Deep State/Military-Industrial-Complex.
I have noticed on the internet one is not permitted to consign others to an out-group by referring to them as base animals, rather 'civilised' people call them narcissists and psychopaths.
I hope you feel admonished for your tribal expressions of authoritarian dogmatism.
Social scientists have very well established ways of identifying sociopaths, psychopaths, narcissists and related/other "Cluster B" mentally dysfunctional, power hungry pathological individuals.
Netanyahu himself OPENLY ADMITTED on USA TV in the 1980s that Israel was founded by "terrorists" (on PBS, William F. Buckley Jr.'s conversative program "Firing Line").
It is astonishing how successful ultra zionist propaganda has been in brainwashing people such that they don't understand even the most basic facts of history.
I can see you feel strongly about this. Apparently too strongly to think about Israel and its current actions dispassionately. As you probably can't have any impact on the outcome I suggest you take it less personally.
probably not, I said we do not police narcissists or their subset psychopaths...
in any case they are not an out-group, they are fully a part of the human continuum, minus the worldbuilding capabilities of the more empathetic, (and assuming I refer to them as an outgroup is part of the refusal to police them, it's woke). They are monster versions of the rest of us, and are animals only as far as we all are.
I take a more gentle view of the monsters. They have perspectives, experiences, and feelings. What they do doesn't bring them happiness. In a sense they're like people with any other mental disorder.
Even if most people admit schizophrenics need to be monitored and cared for, they don't generally think schizophrenics should be punished, or blame them for being crazy. Psychopathy and Narcissism are heritable conditions just like schizophrenia.
lovely world building
For some generational family history on religious groups fleeing military service (Mennonites across the steppe) I can recommend Sofia Samatar with her The White Mosque: A Memoir. London: Hurst & Company, 2022. ISBN 978-1-78738-807-9
""In the late nineteenth century, a group of German-speaking Mennonites traveled from Russia into Central Asia, where their charismatic leader predicted Christ would return. Over a century later, Sofia Samatar joins a tour following their path, fascinated not by the hardships of their journey, but by its aftermath: the establishment of a small Christian village in the Muslim Khanate of Khiva. Named Ak Metchet, 'The White Mosque,' after the Mennonites' whitewashed church, the village lasted for fifty years. In pursuit of this curious history, Samatar discovers a variety of characters whose lives intersect around the ancient Silk Road, from a fifteenth-century astronomer-king, to an intrepid Swiss woman traveler of the 1930s, to the first Uzbek photographer, and explores such topics as Central Asian cinema, Mennonite martyrs, and Samatar's own complex upbringing as the daughter of a Swiss-Mennonite and a Somali-Muslim, raised as a Mennonite of color in America. A secular pilgrimage to a lost village and a near-forgotten history, The White Mosque traces the porous and ever-expanding borders of identity, asking: How do we enter the stories of others? And how, out of the tissue of life, with its weird incidents, buried archives, and startling connections, does a person construct a self?"-- Front jacket flap"