What Burg and the right have in common
The right wing believes that it is permissible to risk our sovereign existence in the name of maintaining the "pure" ideal of the Greater Land of Israel. It turns out that Avraham Burg is so attracted to "pure" spirituality that he, too, is prepared to take that risk.
By Yair ShelegIt is easy to get angry over what Avraham Burg told Haaretz's Ari Shavit in Friday's magazine, primarily because his comments about Israel and Zionism - including his view that a Jewish state is unworkable - will carry double the weight, especially abroad, by virtue of having come from the mouth of a man who used to be chairman of the Jewish Agency and Speaker of the Knesset. All the same, it is much more important to argue with Burg than to be upset at him.
Like many post-Zionists before him, Burg uses the belligerence that has taken Zionism over to justify his divorce from it. Israeli society is indeed a very belligerent one. It exerts a great deal of force against external enemies, and terrible violence has also taken root within. Burg contrasts this belligerence with Jewish spirituality. But in his revulsion at contemporary experience, he ignores the reason that first caused Zionism to rebel against that same spirituality: the feeling that it brought with it a terrible misery, the shameful condition of helplessness in the face of any passing enemy.
Escaping from this passivity did indeed have a price: a need to abandon absolute "Jewish morality" and a need to use force. (Incidentally, "Jewish morality" in the time of the Bible and Mishna was far less moderate than in later periods, when the Jews did not have the option of using force.) Disgust at the price that had to be paid is the common denominator between post-Zionists and right-wing supporters of the Greater Land of Israel. Both adhere to complete, pure ideologies that characterized the Jewish Diaspora dream of longed-for sovereignty. This sovereignty could remain pure as long as it was only a dream. But as soon as it became a reality, it was obligated to make difficult decisions, and people at both extremes refuse to accept this: Right-wingers find it hard to accept a Jewish sovereignty that gives up parts of the Land of Israel, while post-Zionists find it hard to accept a sovereignty that compromises "Jewish morality" and uses brute force.
Burg is right in claiming that for many Israelis, the Holocaust legitimizes a belligerence that quite often exceeds the limits of security needs. But the way to deal with this is not by showing contempt for the trauma of the Holocaust. The Holocaust is not a "complex," as some critical researchers refer to it dismissively, but a genuine trauma. Had one of Burg's children acted violently due to trauma he experienced as a child, it is reasonable to assume that as a father, Burg would oppose the violent behavior but would not scorn the trauma that led to it. Instead, he would presumably use the utmost sensitivity in trying to disentangle the link between the trauma and the violence.
He is also right in arguing that Zionism must now advance to the spiritual phase proposed by Ahad Ha'am in his famous argument with Theodor Herzl. But Burg's contempt for Herzl's physical-political Zionism, which he brings in the name of Ahad Ha'am, is inappropriate, since on the issue of priorities, it was actually Herzl who was right. It was necessary to build a physical-political home for the Jews even before investing in its spiritual quality, and even at its expense - and the Holocaust is the greatest proof of that. The Jewish national home needs two levels, the physical and the spiritual. But the physical level is the foundation and the condition that allows for the existence of the spiritual one, even if the spiritual level is a lot more stimulating.
What Burg and the right wing have in common is remarkable on this issue, too. The right wing believes that it is permissible to risk our sovereign existence in the name of maintaining the "pure" ideal of the Greater Land of Israel. It turns out that Burg is so attracted to "pure" spirituality that he, too, is prepared to take that risk.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Just about everybody in the Middle East suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. Certainly, the Holocaust was a major traumatic event for Jews and the West in general, but the carnage that the people of the region have experienced since the end of WWII is enough to drive anyone crazy. I woulds suggest to you that while faith is important, Human lives are also important. I would not think God would be too happy with anyone who kills another person in his name. Faith is fine, but reason allow people to raise their families in peace.
Repeating, ignorant in Jewish matters, statements of self-rightteous hypocrits. "Both adhere to complete, pure ideologies that characterized the Jewish Diaspora dream of longed-for sovereignty." It sounds as if he never studied Jewish history. Jews did not "dream" about sovereignity. They dreamed about security and equality. The purpose of Zionism was not to obtain "Jewish sovereignity" per say but to protect Jews from prosecution. The mean of protection included establishment sovereign state. The mean, not the purpose. Another mistake he makes about holocaust. It wasn't an unique event in the Jewish history so that it by itself could shape the "paranoia". It was one of many and it did not affect Jewish mentality very much. What did affect a lot was a war of Independence when the first time in 2000 years Jews resisted forced on them expulsion and resisted succesfully. Maybe author's hatred toward "right wing" also comes from his ignorance?
So Israel has no left or center?.Either you are starting to lose contact with reality or you are doing the denial cop out that solves all problems. Sounds like the 9/11 tragedy,where Arabs will still tell you it was all somebody else,even after Sheikh Usama Bin Laden has taken credit for this glorious example of jihad.
Natallie: the title of your post obviously proves you have never been to Israel nor know anything about Israeli politics, so why waste your time here on this talkback ranting on about things you know nothing about? I can name you several left-wing or centre political groups or organisations in Israel. Oh, and as for the following comment made by you: "This is the philosophy of a ruthless and aggressive society who want to grab everything in sight and yet still be considered "good and honorable" by themselves and by others" Were you referring to your own country / the country you live in then?
Lets push the envelope further than the writer would want us to push. Is the suppose "complex" which Mr Sheleg is using to analyse a possible justification to Burg's turn coat from the Zionist entity: Israel; but then over half of the population might have integrated the trauma of the Holocaust, but their cultural and moderate religiosity was as such that their behaviour and their ability to keep the VALUE system "brought" with them in their conscienness: The Sephardim and the Mizrahim Yair has completely ignore the "trauma" of these no-longer minority, today they do make-up the majority; is due to the lack of good leadership that will clarify the Israel ethos: political and cultural. What you have is a complete individualistic-self-centered leaders that were more political hacks than statesmen, whose contribution to the Sovereignty of Israel rely on brute force. It is time for a new Mahapakh, Reform that will moderate the political-cultural GEGEMONY of Euro-centricity, and try to give credit to the Sephardic-Mizrahi side that has kept the Judaistic values and ethics, while in Israel.
This "excessive love" that you describe is also unbalanced and deleterious, perhaps even more lethal for Israel than the international rantings of Burg.
"""The Jewish national home needs two levels, the physical and the spiritual.""" It would be convenient to detach the physical and the spiritual from one another. This would be like detaching morality from reality. In other words, our "morale" ideals can exist independently from our behaviour and not be affected by it. This is the philosophy of a ruthless and aggressive society who want to grab everything in sight and yet still be considered "good and honorable" by themselves and by others. There have been a number societies over the ages that fit this mold. Mostly they are extinct now. It seems that they were considered a menace by others and that their "morale detachment" was only self deception.
This is a foolish comparison. What does one thing have to do with another? In one case a person is slandering his own country and people for his own personal reasons. He is saying false and unconscionable and immoral things of the worst kind, and in a sense working to undermine the security of the Jewish people. The greater land of Israel people , if anything , can be accused of an excessive love of the people and land of Israel. It is possible to disagree with the greater land of Israel people while understanding that their motives and ideals are based on love- and not as Burg's are on hate and vilification.
The equation is simple: a non-Jewish state equals a non-Jewish world. Assimilation will see to that. Indeed, all that would be left would be the Hassidim, the equivalent of a lost tribe in the middle of the Amazon.
Burg can be perceived with compassion if he is indeed a psychiatric case, which he probably is, like a deluded prophet with Jerusalem syndrome clamouring at the gates. As a post-Zionist he is by far the most lethal and demoralizing of the genre, and should just stick to his French passport and residency, and spend his vacations in Monaco or the likes, with other citizens of the world, but not "at home" in Israel.
.."The Holocaust is ...a genuine trauma...to disentangle the link between the trauma and the violence..." To put people who questioned the holocaust in PRISON is not helping the effort to "disentangle the link between the trauma and the violence".
.."The Holocaust is ...a genuine trauma...to disentangle the link between the trauma and the violence..." To put people who questioned the holocaust in PRISON is not helping the effort to "disentangle the link between the trauma and the violence".
THE AVERAGE TIME FOR THE EX COLONIES OF BRITAIN AND FRANCE AROUND 200 YEARS!! SO TALK ABOUT ANOTHER 100 FOR THE ISRAEL THE DREAMERS ENVISAGE . IN THE MEANTIME ITS THE WILD WEST AND HARD GOING FIGHTING THE ARABS