Some other terms that have been used to refer to all or part of the land some call Palestine include Canaan, Land of Israel, the Promised Land, Greater Syria, the Holy Land, Iudaea Province, Judea, Coele-Syria, "Israel HaShlema", Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Zion, Retenu (Ancient Egyptian), Southern Syria, Southern Levant and Syria Palaestina.
Each of these names tells a slightly different story about the land and what relationships exist with which peoples. Depending on which story you are focused on, there were different partitions of lands between different groups who wanted exclusive control over a much larger region (Jordan, Sinai Peninsula, etc).
I don't believe that land should be seen as exclusive to any single of the wide variety of peoples whose origins can be seen in that land, whether they call themselves Jews, Christians, Muslims or have been called Arabs (with the wide variety of meanings of that term, depending on what story is being told with the word).
However, New France was merely another example of European Christian colonialism, and not something that grew out of this land. I see no legitimacy to any claims that they are Indigenous to this land, or that they are victims of Colonialism.
I don't find the terms "Jewish" or "Palestinian" clear enough to determine if we are talking about peoples like the member nations/peoples of the Haudenosaunee or Anishinaabe when talking about connections to this land -- or if we are talking about peoples like the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch, Russia or other examples of clearly foreign European Christian colonialism?
I understand how the violent techniques that the Government of Israel uses against those who most recently lived there feel similar to those that the British North American settler-colonial governments (consolidated into USA and Canada) use – but is it actually a comparable situation?
I agree there should be a ceasefire, but I don’t know how clear it is to end sectarian violence that has been ongoing in a variety of ways for thousands of years.
I don't know that "sectarian violence" has actually been going on in that particular place in any kind of unique way for all that it is talked about like there's been thousands of years of intractable violence that can only be solved through the intervention of outsiders. All land has been subject to migration and tension as the people already present in a place jostle with newcomers or appropriation of resources. New polities emerge as a result of that jostling, but what happened with the emergence of the nation-state and colonialism was a new kind of polity. Palestinian is not the opposite of Jewish, there are Palestinians who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist. They are the people who lived in Palestine before the imposition of the Jewish state and are currently rendered permanent minorities because of how citizenship in that state is constructed.
It is a very comparable situation with what happened here in North America as well as elsewhere, Mahmood Mamdani discusses it in some detail in Neither Settler Nor Native and many others do as well. Hitler openly admired (even referencing it in a 1928 speech) how the US handled the "Indian problem" in extending its territory and Aime Cesaire also drew comparisons, noting that Hitler's crime was doing in Germany what the other colonial powers were doing in Africa and elsewhere. It was in the postwar context of creating a Europe full of ethnostates, including the forced migration of Germans from Eastern European places via the same traincars and camps previously used to hold Jews, that Israel was itself created. So yes, it is all deeply connected and mutually reinforcing.
What would that look like if the British North American settler-colonial governments did something similar? Would that be “better” than the "melting pot" where citizens are expected to treat the foreign imposed institutions of "Canada" and "USA" as what they have a strong identity relationship with rather than the actual peoples who they have a deeper connection?
My wife and I were both claimed as citizens by the Dominion of Canada when we were born, but our relationships to “Canada” and its alleged “identity and values” are different. I have ancestors who came from Europe several generations ago, and fully assimilated to BNA (even the New France ancestors – removed accents from the family name/etc). Her parents were born and raised as Hindus in West Bengal, India.
—-
For "sectarian violence" I'm not only thinking of the Promised Land. I’m aware Zionism started as a way for European Jews to flee from persecution by European Christians – all before Shoah. I’m aware Zionism is primarily funded/resourced/protected by European Christianity (including and especially British North American Christianity, with Evangelical Christians providing the most support).
The violence between different denominations of Abrahamic religions (different forms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) have been ongoing since each denomination formed (and reformed - it is like a big bowl of spaghetti rather than some simple forks in the road). I consider the Christian (Western/Roman and Eastern) violence against Jews within Europe to be part of the same sectarian violence we are observing today.
I have what to me is an uncomfortable question to ask, as it relates to how I think about those who live on the land some call Palestine.
I know many who are descendants of New France and other French colonists who consider themselves to be victims of British Colonialism.
https://mcormond.blogspot.com/2022/09/french-descendents.html
Some other terms that have been used to refer to all or part of the land some call Palestine include Canaan, Land of Israel, the Promised Land, Greater Syria, the Holy Land, Iudaea Province, Judea, Coele-Syria, "Israel HaShlema", Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Zion, Retenu (Ancient Egyptian), Southern Syria, Southern Levant and Syria Palaestina.
Each of these names tells a slightly different story about the land and what relationships exist with which peoples. Depending on which story you are focused on, there were different partitions of lands between different groups who wanted exclusive control over a much larger region (Jordan, Sinai Peninsula, etc).
I don't believe that land should be seen as exclusive to any single of the wide variety of peoples whose origins can be seen in that land, whether they call themselves Jews, Christians, Muslims or have been called Arabs (with the wide variety of meanings of that term, depending on what story is being told with the word).
However, New France was merely another example of European Christian colonialism, and not something that grew out of this land. I see no legitimacy to any claims that they are Indigenous to this land, or that they are victims of Colonialism.
I don't find the terms "Jewish" or "Palestinian" clear enough to determine if we are talking about peoples like the member nations/peoples of the Haudenosaunee or Anishinaabe when talking about connections to this land -- or if we are talking about peoples like the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch, Russia or other examples of clearly foreign European Christian colonialism?
I understand how the violent techniques that the Government of Israel uses against those who most recently lived there feel similar to those that the British North American settler-colonial governments (consolidated into USA and Canada) use – but is it actually a comparable situation?
I agree there should be a ceasefire, but I don’t know how clear it is to end sectarian violence that has been ongoing in a variety of ways for thousands of years.
I don't know that "sectarian violence" has actually been going on in that particular place in any kind of unique way for all that it is talked about like there's been thousands of years of intractable violence that can only be solved through the intervention of outsiders. All land has been subject to migration and tension as the people already present in a place jostle with newcomers or appropriation of resources. New polities emerge as a result of that jostling, but what happened with the emergence of the nation-state and colonialism was a new kind of polity. Palestinian is not the opposite of Jewish, there are Palestinians who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist. They are the people who lived in Palestine before the imposition of the Jewish state and are currently rendered permanent minorities because of how citizenship in that state is constructed.
It is a very comparable situation with what happened here in North America as well as elsewhere, Mahmood Mamdani discusses it in some detail in Neither Settler Nor Native and many others do as well. Hitler openly admired (even referencing it in a 1928 speech) how the US handled the "Indian problem" in extending its territory and Aime Cesaire also drew comparisons, noting that Hitler's crime was doing in Germany what the other colonial powers were doing in Africa and elsewhere. It was in the postwar context of creating a Europe full of ethnostates, including the forced migration of Germans from Eastern European places via the same traincars and camps previously used to hold Jews, that Israel was itself created. So yes, it is all deeply connected and mutually reinforcing.
Added Mahmood Mamdani to my future reading. Thanks.
I'm trying to figure out how to put into context how the Israel government separates "citizenship" and "nationality".
https://en.idi.org.il/articles/6516
What would that look like if the British North American settler-colonial governments did something similar? Would that be “better” than the "melting pot" where citizens are expected to treat the foreign imposed institutions of "Canada" and "USA" as what they have a strong identity relationship with rather than the actual peoples who they have a deeper connection?
My wife and I were both claimed as citizens by the Dominion of Canada when we were born, but our relationships to “Canada” and its alleged “identity and values” are different. I have ancestors who came from Europe several generations ago, and fully assimilated to BNA (even the New France ancestors – removed accents from the family name/etc). Her parents were born and raised as Hindus in West Bengal, India.
—-
For "sectarian violence" I'm not only thinking of the Promised Land. I’m aware Zionism started as a way for European Jews to flee from persecution by European Christians – all before Shoah. I’m aware Zionism is primarily funded/resourced/protected by European Christianity (including and especially British North American Christianity, with Evangelical Christians providing the most support).
The violence between different denominations of Abrahamic religions (different forms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) have been ongoing since each denomination formed (and reformed - it is like a big bowl of spaghetti rather than some simple forks in the road). I consider the Christian (Western/Roman and Eastern) violence against Jews within Europe to be part of the same sectarian violence we are observing today.