Jump to content
IGNORED

Does Anna T live in Israeli settlements?


YPestis

Recommended Posts

In spite of her religious right wing views, I struggle to imagine Anna as a settler, wouldn't she need to be a bit, well, tougher than she appears to be?

That certainly doesn't make her more likable or sympathetic to me, I'm sort of pro-Israel (as in, support its right to exist peacefully, don't necessarily support its politicians' choices) but I find settlers a nasty piece of work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beeks, JFC didn't say she wished for Anna's death. She didn't say Anna deserved to die either. She simply said that Anna was scum and she had no pity for her. You are infering a hell of a lot into JFC's post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In spite of her religious right wing views, I struggle to imagine Anna as a settler, wouldn't she need to be a bit, well, tougher than she appears to be?

.

I think you may be picturing settlement life as a lot tougher than it really is. With the exception of young communities t most settlements are more like towns or small cities, and many settlers are just ordinary people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a really ignorant question: Do settlers consider the areas in which they live to be legally part of Israel? I ask because her blog "about me" info states that she "lives in one of the most beautiful areas of Israel?" It seems disingenuous to write about living in Israel if you're living illegally on a settlement. Or am I clueless about the realities of settlements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous
I have a really ignorant question: Do settlers consider the areas in which they live to be legally part of Israel? I ask because her blog "about me" info states that she "lives in one of the most beautiful areas of Israel?" It seems disingenuous to write about living in Israel if you're living illegally on a settlement. Or am I clueless about the realities of settlements?

The settlements in that region are authorised by the Israeli government and are quite developed. Anna doesn't consider her position to be illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't exactly remember how I stumbled across this blog - perhaps someone here mentioned it at one time? - but it's an American who has moved to Israel and describes the culture and differences and daily life in Israel in a manner completely opposite of the way Anna T describes Israeli life. In fact, if I didn't know differently, I'd assume Anna was an American Christian fundie SAHM. The life she describes doesn't seem to bear any relation to the life of this blogger (whose name I can't seem to remember.) The new blogger is really funny and it's quite fascinating.

//howtobeisraeli.blogspot.com/

The best post is about visiting her husband's grandparents:

//howtobeisraeli.blogspot.com/2009/05/have-polish-grandparents.html

The blogger finds the grandparents sweet and caring while I just imagine Anna T. succumbing to the vapors, delicate flower that she is.

ETA: edited the links - I don't know what she'd think about Free Jinger and I have no interest in snarking on her; I find her interesting, intelligent, articulate and funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, not a fan of the settlements or right wing Israeli politics. But I'm equally not enthused about the trendy 'Palestinians GOOOD! Israelis BAAAAD!' messaging that renders the situation rather simplistic, IMO. It takes two to tangle here. The Israelis are not wrong to assume that the Arab countries won't be happy until they're gone, and the Palestinians are not wrong that they have been unfairly treated by the Israelis. From my observation, the settlements are the result of years of frustrations on both sides. Finger pointing is unhelpful. If they can't come to permanent and acceptable terms, then more children will be killed. And I'm not a fan of children dying in the crossfire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the OP and did not intend this to become a political thread, although I guess that was unrealistic given the controversial nature of the settlements in Israeli-occupied areas.

I was trying to figure out if Anna was living one of those ILLEGAL settlements. My understanding is that some of the settlements are tolerated and considered legal (is that the correct term?) by the Israeli government. And then there are some that are considered illegal and have been bulldozed by the Israeli military for violating the terms of agreement.

I was wondering if Anna lives near or around those illegal areas. I assume she sympathizes with right wing Jews who believe that the entire area should be settled by Jews as fulfilling of a religious promise. She about said as much in one post. In fact, her reasoning is very similar to what white settlers said to justify taking Indian land, but that's another thread.

As for putting her family in danger. Yes, if she lives in a disputed territory, that seems reckless. I believe it is morally wrong to justify taking an area simply because your ancestors lived there several hundred years ago and contributing to a process that displaces and marginalize an entire populace. As a Soviet Jew, you'd think Anna would empathize with being a minority group that is maligned and displaced by government policies. I guess it shows that it is one facet of human nature to want to justify the taking of property through racism and prejudice.

I am surprised Anna is "living on the land", so to speak. She is raising animals and starting a garden. Given her low energy and constant need for naps, I'm surprised she's able to take up so much extra physical labor. The urban housewife seems a more suitable lifestyle.

I used to think Anna and her husband choose their current home because it was cheaper to live there and the only house they could afford. My understanding is the larger Israeli cities are expensive to live in, and her husband does not have a great job or enjoy financial stability. The settlements and outlying areas may be the only places she could afford to own a house and stay home.

Regardless of the reasons, I doubt Anna's place of resident is as picturesque as she portrays in her blog. I admire her ability to appreciate beauty everywhere, but the snippets of daily live indicates she lives in a very rural area, in a tiny, probably run down home and daily life is filled with small difficulties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous
I was trying to figure out if Anna was living one of those ILLEGAL settlements. My understanding is that some of the settlements are tolerated and considered legal (is that the correct term?) by the Israeli government. And then there are some that are considered illegal and have been bulldozed by the Israeli military for violating the terms of agreement.
My understanding is that the settlement is authorized by the Israeli government but considered illegal under international law?

I am surprised Anna is "living on the land", so to speak. She is raising animals and starting a garden. Given her low energy and constant need for naps, I'm surprised she's able to take up so much extra physical labor. The urban housewife seems a more suitable lifestyle.

I used to think Anna and her husband choose their current home because it was cheaper to live there and the only house they could afford. My understanding is the larger Israeli cities are expensive to live in, and her husband does not have a great job or enjoy financial stability. The settlements and outlying areas may be the only places she could afford to own a house and stay home.

Regardless of the reasons, I doubt Anna's place of resident is as picturesque as she portrays in her blog. I admire her ability to appreciate beauty everywhere, but the snippets of daily live indicates she lives in a very rural area, in a tiny, probably run down home and daily life is filled with small difficulties.

They bought their first home outright, possibly enabled by the fact the land was.... 'cheap'. They have moved 2-3 times and now have a smallholding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, not a fan of the settlements or right wing Israeli politics. But I'm equally not enthused about the trendy 'Palestinians GOOOD! Israelis BAAAAD!' messaging that renders the situation rather simplistic, IMO. It takes two to tangle here. The Israelis are not wrong to assume that the Arab countries won't be happy until they're gone, and the Palestinians are not wrong that they have been unfairly treated by the Israelis. From my observation, the settlements are the result of years of frustrations on both sides. Finger pointing is unhelpful. If they can't come to permanent and acceptable terms, then more children will be killed. And I'm not a fan of children dying in the crossfire.

D'you want to check the stats of how many have been killed on either side? You might find it illuminative.

You might also want to think about how fun it's to be threatened by Zionists or by the police for defending the rights of Palestinians. Both of which have happened to me on demos and at meetings. Yeah, that was just trendy as shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am certainly no Zionist and am mostly frustrated that this conflict is still going on after so many years. I hope the Palestinians get statehood.

OTOH, I think your view on the conflict may be a bit simplistic. I think aggythenostic's description is pretty accurate: there's nuts on both sides who make things suck. I am no fan of the Israeli government. I also no fan of Hamas jihadists whose goal is to "drive the Jews into the sea" (which is literally in their manifesto). Does every Israeli think the settlements are a good idea and want to withhold statehood from Palestine? Absolutely not - check out the Israel Loves Iran movement for example. Does every Palestinian want to kill all the Jews and/or think it's a great idea to suicide-bomb buses? Of course not. But there are extremists on either side and they keep this conflict going.

The death toll on either side is tragic but needs to be nuanced in order to be used as proof of anything. The higher death toll on the Palestinian side is not just linked with the amount of rockets thrown, but also with the fact that Israel has bomb shelters, which Gaza does not. If this was not the case, the death toll would be much more evenly balanced because this is not a case of one side throwing rockets ALL THE TIME LIKE A LUNATIC with the other side passively standing by.

PS: I am sorry about crazy Zionists bothering you though. I've had some interesting Facebook conversations of that nature and I can't imagine how awful it would be IRL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put, Esther. I can see this is a very personal thing for you, Jesus Fight Club [Heh. Funny to write that out!]. And I'm not trying to offend you. But it IS not fair to say that in a remarkably complex situation there can be simple black and white. There isn't. There is pain and anger and idiot extremists on both sides.

I don't have a single Jewish friend who isn't as disgusted with the right wing government in Israel as they are with the crazy right wingers in the states. Most Israelis are not crazy Zionist idiots, you know. Most are just trying to raise their families and get on with things in a country that has never not been at war. Just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a single Jewish friend who isn't as disgusted with the right wing government in Israel as they are with the crazy right wingers in the states. Most Israelis are not crazy Zionist idiots, you know. Most are just trying to raise their families and get on with things in a country that has never not been at war. Just saying.

That makes more sense than it doesn't. I suppose it would be too logical to find a chunk of Russia currently not being used and ship all the wingnuts there? Ours and the Israelis'? Sarah Palin can wave to them from her house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put, Esther. I can see this is a very personal thing for you, Jesus Fight Club [Heh. Funny to write that out!]. And I'm not trying to offend you. But it IS not fair to say that in a remarkably complex situation there can be simple black and white. There isn't. There is pain and anger and idiot extremists on both sides.

I don't have a single Jewish friend who isn't as disgusted with the right wing government in Israel as they are with the crazy right wingers in the states. Most Israelis are not crazy Zionist idiots, you know. Most are just trying to raise their families and get on with things in a country that has never not been at war. Just saying.

A comrade of mine was there when Rachel Corrie died. Just saying.

I think there comes a point where we have to say "Yeah. That was really quite dramatically wrong". I think the deaths of 165 Palestinians under an Israeli regime where quotes from people who say things like "Flatten Gaza completely" are applauded has easily reached that point.

Your mates I am sure are nice people, as are you yourself. There is now, however, an issue of complicity and an issue of defence of the indefensible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might also want to think about how fun it's to be threatened by Zionists or by the police for defending the rights of Palestinians.

And I've been threatened and called all manner of things because I'm openly Jewish, and it is subsequently assumed that I must support everything the Israeli government has ever done, is currently doing and will ever do, because Jews. Or something. I'm not trying to discount your experiences; fundamentalists of any stripe (and there are absolutely fundamentalist Zionists, and I mean that in a political sense, not a religious one) suck, but it cuts both ways. For the record, I don't support the settlements at all, I think Netanyahu is a douchebag of extraordinary proportions, and I have made a very deliberate choice to withhold any and all personal financial support from Israel, partially because of the Israel/Palestine conflict and partly because of the way the Israelis treat the women, gay people, non-Orthodox and Arabs that live within their own borders. I don't have a choice about U.S. taxes, but then, I do think it's politically expedient in many ways to maintain certain ties with Israel, so my feelings on that question are somewhat different. To be clear, I don't Hamas or that crowd, either, except that I think the Israelis should have given the Palestinians their own state years ago and had done with it once and for all, but those who hold the "the Israelis should be driven into the sea" view are being completely unrealistic and unhelpful, IMHO. It's too late for that, it won't be happening, and the sooner we all deal with that reality and start trying to find a viable solution to the situation, the better. I do think that Israel (and Northern Ireland, and Kashmir, for that matter, amongst other places) is a great example of what happens when certain colonial powers make a habit of promising the same thing to multiple sides in a conflict and then swan out of the area, as they are wont to do. It's easy to be very righteous about it now, but the fact of the matter is that there are a number of concrete things that could have been done sixty or seventy years ago that, in all likelihood, would have precluded the existence of Israel entirely, but they weren't done. We're reaping the consequences now, and trying to turn back the clock and say, "Well, Israel shouldn't even be there!" is of no use. It is there, and it's not going anywhere. The only question is what form it's going to take in twenty or thirty years.

I would also point out that in a lot of cases, there's no love lost at all between a lot of Israelis and the settler crowd, particularly those in the religious settlements. In a lot of cases, those settlers have little to no regard for the non-religious population, many of whom are serving their time in the army and risking their lives to defend these people, many of whom eschew military service in favor of religious study (or, in some cases, don't think Israel should exist as a Jewish state at all- not that that precludes them from enjoying certain benefits and protections from said state). It's a huge issue in Israel right now, and I honestly think that if the question of the Haredi community in Israel, particularly the disproportionate influence ultra-Orthodox rabbis and political parties exert over the government, isn't solved, the state is likely to collapse in upon itself, anyway. In a few more generations, the Haredim will outnumber the secular and religious Zionist Jews, and the state will simply be unable to support them if they continue to hew to their current lifestyle (namely, decades of Torah study to the exclusion of work, national service, et cetera). As a Jew, I hope that that doesn't happen, but if it does, frankly, Israel would have stopped being a sanctuary for Jews long before it came to that (and, in some ways, has already ceased to be a place where all Jews are welcome).

Israel saddens me deeply, because its actions do not represent my beliefs as a Jew or as a human being, and it's a shame to see a state that could be so much more than the sum of its parts do such a great job of being its own worst enemy. I don't think the Palestinians have done themselves any favors, either, in a number of respects, and I think their cause is very much hijacked by neighboring Arab states as a way of drawing internal attention away from their own corrupt, oppressive governments and toward external issues, but the Palestinians have gotten a very raw deal, and I completely understand why they're pissed off. It sucks, and there are no winners here. The situation, in many ways, reminds me of the situation in Northern Ireland, which gives me some hope that it can move towards resolution, but that took centuries to reach some state of equilibrium, so I'm not holding out a lot of hope. Both sides are ultimately going to have to love peace and love their kids more than they love being right or winning to reach a solution, and that isn't the case for enough people right now. There's also the fact that it's very much in the interests of the politicians in charge of both sides to keep the conflict going, but this post is long enough without that discussion. I suppose all of this is a long-winded way of saying that I don't see how saying, "Oh, they're all scum"- about either side of this fiasco- is helpful to anyone involved. Righteous anger is great and all, but it only gets you so far, in my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FaustianSlip, I too am Jewish and I completely agree with your post. I am very, very skeptical of Israel and Israeli politics but I think that unilaterally condemning one side as "scum" is wrong as well. Mostly I feel for the victims on either side of this conflict - the Palestinians who have been used as poster children by so many groups and who still aren't any better off, and the Israelis who do not agree with the more extreme measures of their government but who still get to run to bomb shelters whenever an alarm goes off.

ETA: And I too would like to stress that many Israelis, such two friends of mine in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, are extremely critical of fundamentalist settlers who do not contribute to the country in any way yet expect others to go to war on their behalf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YPetsis:

I only have a couple of minutes, but I'll try to give a quick run-down of the different "categories" of settlements and settlers.

Generally speaking, "settlements" refers to areas built by Israelis over the "Green Line" aka pre-1967 border.

1. Some parts of Jerusalem were annexed by Israel after the 1967 war. These areas are under regular Israeli law and not military occupation, but the international community does not recognize the annexation. Areas such as Ramot, which was formally part of the demilitarized zone between Israel and Jordan, fall into this category. Israelis, in general, don't consider these areas as "settlements", but some in the international community do.

2. Next, there are areas which are fairly built up and considered to be "settlement blocks". This would include Ma'ale Adumim, Gush Etzion and Ariel. Many of the settlers in these areas were attracted by the chance to live a rural/suburban lifestyle, not by radical politics. The politics of the people there varies - some are secular, some are religious Zionist, and some have even supported the Labor Party. These areas are not considered to be a technical part of the State of Israel, unlike the first category, but are in areas under Israeli control. The most recent language used in peace talks mentions "land swaps", and many assume that some or all of these areas would be incorporated into the State of Israel in the future in exchange for other areas (such as a land bridge between the West Bank and Gaza, and/or some areas in the north) being given to the Palestinian Authority.

3. Then, there are the more isolated settlements. It is highly unlikely that these would be retained in any peace deal. The settlers in these settlements are still a mix of secular and religious, but politically tend to be a bit more hard-core.

4. Two settlements in particular stand out from category 3 - Hebron and Yitzhar. People don't live there for the lifestyle. They do so for political reasons. They also tend to attract a fairly high number of English-speaking settlers. In other words, these aren't people who came to Israel because they were fleeing persecution and had nowhere else to go. They are people who left behind a more comfortable life, and wanted to live on the edge. The very fact that they encounter opposition makes them feel that their mere presence is serving a purpose. [While the substance of the political beliefs is very different, I actually notice some similarities in personality between them and JFC.]

5. Finally, there are the "outposts" - new areas built contrary to the orders of the Israeli government, in violation of settlement freezes. Sometimes, these are ignored, other times they are dismantled by the army.

There are also "no go" areas for Israelis, which are under the administration of the Palestinian Authority. Israeli settlers were evicted from Gaza during the disengagement in 2005, and they are not permitted in certain areas of the West Bank.

Re gay rights: Israel is reasonably progressive in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't automatically think Israelis are scum. That's a misrepresentation of my position. However, I do think people who live in illegal settlements and actively support them are scum. I don't care how cute they look getting married. They're still scum.

Many Israelis are great and good people. Some fight actively against this crime being perpetuated against the Palestinians. And it's not to do with being Jewish. Any more than it's wrong to be Christian. The problem isn't being a Christian or being Jewish. It's being a fundie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I do think people who live in illegal settlements and actively support them are scum. I don't care how cute they look getting married. They're still scum.

There is a subset of people who live in the settlements who moved their because the government made it cheap for them to do so. It was a dumb as fuck thing for the Israeli government to do, but it's a pretty difficult mistake to fix once made.

As for those who live in the settlements because they think it's the land that God promised to them...frankly, I think that if that's what they believe, than they should believe that God alone is enough to protect them. And if he's not (presuming he exists), then maybe he doesn't want them to live on that land after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it's not to do with being Jewish. Any more than it's wrong to be Christian. The problem isn't being a Christian or being Jewish. It's being a fundie.

Except that very often, in my experience, the hypothetical "illegal settler" or "Zionist" or whatever terminology one is using very rapidly becomes conflated with "the Jews," at which point it's usually a pretty short trip down the rabbit hole. I'm not saying that that's the case with you, JFC, not least because I can't really imagine you rolling that way, but I've stood there and had it happen to me too many times to just write off. And I'm not someone who generally allows herself to be lured into Israel/Palestine conversations very often, because I think they're almost always non-productive. I've had people literally end up staring at me, speechless, when I've broken into a rant about how "the Jews" are no better than the Nazis with what they're doing, and the settlements, and so on by saying, "Wait- you know that not all Jews actually agree with anything you've just said, right? Not even all Israeli Jews, which is a fraction of the world's Jewish population?" I don't like being made to feel as if there's this idea hanging over me that somehow I am less loyal to my own country or unable to disagree with the state of Israel because I'm Jewish, and that's exactly how people with certain political views have treated me way too many times for me to be comfortable with that. That doesn't mean that I don't ultimately feel similarly about people who choose to move to illegal settlements (i.e. you make your choice, you take your chances, and don't expect the army to come bailing you out), though I suspect we would differ on what we're classifying as illegal settlements (as Pomology mentioned, in cases where the Israeli government is luring people into these places by offering subsidies and cheap rents, I have a bit more sympathy for the people who find themselves moving there).

I think I object to the way you're talking about these people not because I disagree that they're engaging in despicable behavior, JFC, but because I've been treated as if I'm one of those so-called "scum" not because of my actual views on the conflict or because of my support for what they're about, but because it is assumed that I, as a coreligionist, must completely support what they're doing. I'm not given the opportunity to explain my position, I just have shit shoveled on me as a convenient representation of the State of Israel to yell at or something, I don't know. Some people are jagoffs. I don't think you're those people, but I do think that that behavior comes about, in part, because of some of the rhetoric that gets thrown around. I see similar stuff in pro-Israel circles, too, and it bothers me just as much there. This is perhaps why my feelings on the conflict would be best described as "numb."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YPetsis:

I only have a couple of minutes, but I'll try to give a quick run-down of the different "categories" of settlements and settlers.

Generally speaking, "settlements" refers to areas built by Israelis over the "Green Line" aka pre-1967 border.

1. Some parts of Jerusalem were annexed by Israel after the 1967 war. These areas are under regular Israeli law and not military occupation, but the international community does not recognize the annexation. Areas such as Ramot, which was formally part of the demilitarized zone between Israel and Jordan, fall into this category. Israelis, in general, don't consider these areas as "settlements", but some in the international community do.

2. Next, there are areas which are fairly built up and considered to be "settlement blocks". This would include Ma'ale Adumim, Gush Etzion and Ariel. Many of the settlers in these areas were attracted by the chance to live a rural/suburban lifestyle, not by radical politics. The politics of the people there varies - some are secular, some are religious Zionist, and some have even supported the Labor Party. These areas are not considered to be a technical part of the State of Israel, unlike the first category, but are in areas under Israeli control. The most recent language used in peace talks mentions "land swaps", and many assume that some or all of these areas would be incorporated into the State of Israel in the future in exchange for other areas (such as a land bridge between the West Bank and Gaza, and/or some areas in the north) being given to the Palestinian Authority.

3. Then, there are the more isolated settlements. It is highly unlikely that these would be retained in any peace deal. The settlers in these settlements are still a mix of secular and religious, but politically tend to be a bit more hard-core.

4. Two settlements in particular stand out from category 3 - Hebron and Yitzhar. People don't live there for the lifestyle. They do so for political reasons. They also tend to attract a fairly high number of English-speaking settlers. In other words, these aren't people who came to Israel because they were fleeing persecution and had nowhere else to go. They are people who left behind a more comfortable life, and wanted to live on the edge. The very fact that they encounter opposition makes them feel that their mere presence is serving a purpose. [While the substance of the political beliefs is very different, I actually notice some similarities in personality between them and JFC.]

5. Finally, there are the "outposts" - new areas built contrary to the orders of the Israeli government, in violation of settlement freezes. Sometimes, these are ignored, other times they are dismantled by the army.

There are also "no go" areas for Israelis, which are under the administration of the Palestinian Authority. Israeli settlers were evicted from Gaza during the disengagement in 2005, and they are not permitted in certain areas of the West Bank.

Re gay rights: Israel is reasonably progressive in this area.

Thanks for the clarification. I think I was thinking Anna T lived in contested areas which seems (to me) more dangerous than established areas. It seems more Anna T's style to want to live near settled areas but the pictures of her area seems so desolate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.