borjastick wrote:He keeps banging on about jewish homelessness during and after the second world war. Really? How was their plight any different to millions of others? The jews were no more homeless than many others, and in reality weren't homeless at all.
They just conflated all their woes into one strategic argument to get Palestine. The thirteenth tribe, who of course aren't even real jews have ruined judaism for the rest.
When that time's Zionists said 'home', they were talking about a country of their own, a Jewish state in Palestine, not about a home as we understand it today. During the 1930's and 1940's, the Zionists unceasingly claimed that the alleged terrible plight of Jewry came from its own NATIONAL homelessness and that the only solution to all the Jewish sufferings (real and fictional) was the colonial grabbing of Palestine and the establishment of a Jewish state there. As far as homes in today's meaning were concerned, the Zionists worked very hard for the liquidation of as many Jewish homes as possible by the Nazis and their collaborators, for the uprooting of Jewry in Central and Eastern Europe by antisemites (accordingly to the plans and teachings of their messiah Theodor Herzl), before and during WW2, that in order to induce a large Jewish immigration into Palestine. In other words, the Zionists managed to turn the nationally homeless Jews of Central and Eastern Europe (homeless only according to the Zionist views) into residentially homeless people in order to fulfill their own political ambitions in the end.
Few people understand that post-Herzlian Zionism was in fact a war on assimilated Jews, and not a kind of humanitarian reaction to antisemitism as claimed by their own propagandists. IMO, Herzl was sincere when he said that there was no cure for antisemitism except the transfer of the Jews to another land, preferably Palestine, but his successors became so fascinated by the idea of a Jewish state in the Holy Land that they were willing to fuel antisemitism as much as needed to cause their dear 'rebirth of Zion'. In other words, my understanding is that Herzl was moved by genuine humanitarian concerns while his successors were moved by nationalistic appetites and mystico-territorial ambitions.