What do you think?
Rate this book
Comment le peuple juif fut inventé: De la Bible au sionisme
Quand le peuple juif fut-il créé ? Est-ce il y a quatre mille ans, ou bien sous la plume d'historiens juifs du XIXe siècle qui ont reconstitué rétrospectivement un peuple afin de façonner une nation future ?Dans ce livre qui a fait date, Shlomo Sand a montré pour la première fois comment, à partir du XIXe siècle, le temps biblique a commencé à être considéré par les sionistes comme le temps historique, celui de la naissance d'une nation.Si ses propos ont soulevé une onde de choc dans le monde entier, c'est que derrière le débat historiographique se cache une question brûlante : à l'heure où certains généticiens israéliens cherchent encore à démontrer que les juifs forment un peuple doté d'un ADN spécifique, que cache aujourd'hui le concept d'"État juif", et pourquoi cette entité n'a-t-elle pas réussi jusqu'à maintenant à se constituer en une république appartenant à l'ensemble de ses citoyens, quelle que soit leur religion ? En dénonçant cette dérogation profonde au principe sur lequel se fonde toute démocratie moderne, c'est une critique de la politique identitaire de son pays que propose Shlomo Sand.
612 pages, Pocket Book
First published January 1, 2012
185 people are currently reading
2562 people want to read
About the author
Shlomo Sand
35 books259 followersShlomo Sand is professor of history at Tel Aviv University and author of the controversial book The Invention of the Jewish People (Verso Books, 2009). His main areas of teaching are nationalism, film as history and French intellectual history.
Sand was born to Polish Jewish survivors of the Holocaust. His parents had Communist and anti-imperialist views and refused to receive compensations from Germany for their suffering during the Second World War. Sand spent his early years in a displaced persons camp, and moved with the family to Jaffa in 1948. He was expelled from high school at the age of sixteen, and only completed his bagrut following his military service. He eventually left the Union of Israeli Communist Youth (Banki) and joined the more radical, and anti-Zionist, Matzpen in 1968. Sand resigned from Matzpen in 1970 due to his disillusionment with the organisation.
He declined an offer by the Israeli Communist Party Rakah to be sent to do cinema studies in Poland, and in 1975 Sand graduated with a BA in History from Tel Aviv University. From 1975 to 1985, after winning a scholarship, he studied and later taught in Paris, receiving an MA in French History and a PhD for his thesis on "George Sorel and Marxism". Since 1982, Sand has taught at Tel Aviv University as well as at the University of California, Berkeley and the École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris.
Sand was born to Polish Jewish survivors of the Holocaust. His parents had Communist and anti-imperialist views and refused to receive compensations from Germany for their suffering during the Second World War. Sand spent his early years in a displaced persons camp, and moved with the family to Jaffa in 1948. He was expelled from high school at the age of sixteen, and only completed his bagrut following his military service. He eventually left the Union of Israeli Communist Youth (Banki) and joined the more radical, and anti-Zionist, Matzpen in 1968. Sand resigned from Matzpen in 1970 due to his disillusionment with the organisation.
He declined an offer by the Israeli Communist Party Rakah to be sent to do cinema studies in Poland, and in 1975 Sand graduated with a BA in History from Tel Aviv University. From 1975 to 1985, after winning a scholarship, he studied and later taught in Paris, receiving an MA in French History and a PhD for his thesis on "George Sorel and Marxism". Since 1982, Sand has taught at Tel Aviv University as well as at the University of California, Berkeley and the École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews
September 24, 2013
As a Muslim, there is a great lesson in self reflection to be learnt from this critical analysis for creation of the 'myth' of land of Israel, conjured up by Zionists in order to justify forced annexation of Palestine. I have to give credit to Jewish culture for relatively more accepting alternate views instead of rejecting any criticism like my own Islamic culture. This way all the positive and negative aspects of any contentious issue can be very effectively ring fenced within, instead of leaving voids for outsiders to take shots at, like Islam has to go through repeatability.
Sholomo makes a very convincing case against the whole legality of Israel especially when he points out that there was no tradition of pilgrimage in Jews unlike Christianity and Islam. He calls this shift towards pilgrimage 'Christian Zionism'. But I don't really see his objective, for even if Jewish traditions were relatively late in adopting pilgrimage aping Christians, Jewish pilgrimage is here to stay. For I know that in Islam pilgrimage to Kaaba made prominence after the death of the Prophet, for during his life he only made one proper pilgrimage. His first attempt to get to Kaaba was thwarted and he had to make the pilgrimage away from Kaaba, a tradition never really adopted by popular Islam. In this regards I do agree with the author when he suggests that history is directed by a select few writers and scholars of that time who may not be reflecting the view of ordinary masses of that era. I guess the author is attempting to convey his alternate fringe point of view so that future generations can objectify. I don't seriously believe that public opinion will ever change in Israel due to his work though. Because at the moment, the Jews have managed to acquire majority in Israel and successfully ousted Arabs from the land of their forefathers. World opinion was partly responsible for creation of Israel but mainly Jews after years of being on the run in Europe were finally given a golden opportunity to finally settle down, which they accepted with a lot of rigour. State propaganda based on selective reading of history occurs in almost every country. In the country of my birth Pakistan, we have similar trend in education where Pakistan is directly linked with the advent of a distant Islamic culture, blatantly ignoring the strong cultural ties with the local Hindu culture, which seems far more plausible in my opinion. I guess this strong need to forge an identity is required to cover atrocities against minorities which both Pakistan and Israel are sort of known for.
Sholomo after a slowish start makes a very powerful case in favour of his primary argument (Holy-land to Homeland). His analysis considers the personal religious inclinations of the primary movers for a Jewish homeland in Britain. I think he has very successfully demonstrated the influence of religion on politics in the book as in my opinion religion may not be the primary motive, but is very useful for justification and motivational purposes when making convincing arguments. Sholomo has demonstrated the urgent need for a Jewish homeland in the wake of the huge number of immigrants in mainland Britain after the Bolshevik revolution. The threat of the new immigrant coupled with religious justification that Jews have to installed in the Holy-land (as per the Bible) created huge supporters of Zionism in Britain.
Sholomo makes a very convincing case against the whole legality of Israel especially when he points out that there was no tradition of pilgrimage in Jews unlike Christianity and Islam. He calls this shift towards pilgrimage 'Christian Zionism'. But I don't really see his objective, for even if Jewish traditions were relatively late in adopting pilgrimage aping Christians, Jewish pilgrimage is here to stay. For I know that in Islam pilgrimage to Kaaba made prominence after the death of the Prophet, for during his life he only made one proper pilgrimage. His first attempt to get to Kaaba was thwarted and he had to make the pilgrimage away from Kaaba, a tradition never really adopted by popular Islam. In this regards I do agree with the author when he suggests that history is directed by a select few writers and scholars of that time who may not be reflecting the view of ordinary masses of that era. I guess the author is attempting to convey his alternate fringe point of view so that future generations can objectify. I don't seriously believe that public opinion will ever change in Israel due to his work though. Because at the moment, the Jews have managed to acquire majority in Israel and successfully ousted Arabs from the land of their forefathers. World opinion was partly responsible for creation of Israel but mainly Jews after years of being on the run in Europe were finally given a golden opportunity to finally settle down, which they accepted with a lot of rigour. State propaganda based on selective reading of history occurs in almost every country. In the country of my birth Pakistan, we have similar trend in education where Pakistan is directly linked with the advent of a distant Islamic culture, blatantly ignoring the strong cultural ties with the local Hindu culture, which seems far more plausible in my opinion. I guess this strong need to forge an identity is required to cover atrocities against minorities which both Pakistan and Israel are sort of known for.
Sholomo after a slowish start makes a very powerful case in favour of his primary argument (Holy-land to Homeland). His analysis considers the personal religious inclinations of the primary movers for a Jewish homeland in Britain. I think he has very successfully demonstrated the influence of religion on politics in the book as in my opinion religion may not be the primary motive, but is very useful for justification and motivational purposes when making convincing arguments. Sholomo has demonstrated the urgent need for a Jewish homeland in the wake of the huge number of immigrants in mainland Britain after the Bolshevik revolution. The threat of the new immigrant coupled with religious justification that Jews have to installed in the Holy-land (as per the Bible) created huge supporters of Zionism in Britain.
December 7, 2012
The Invention of the Land of Israel by Shlomo Sand
"The Invention of the Land of Israel" is the follow up to the fascinating and controversial "The Invention of the Jewish People". This excellent book serves as a complementary addition to the aforementioned book and fills gaps left behind. Historian and outspoken professor, Shlomo Sand does it again with this enlightening and educational book that reveals the history behind the Land of Israel. This 304-page book is composed of the following five chapters: 1. Making Homelands: Biological Imperative or National Property?, 2. Mytherritory: In the Beginning, God Promised the Land, 3. Toward a Christian Zionism: and Balfour Promised the Land, 4. Zionism Versus Judaism: The Conquest of "Ethnic" Space, and 5. Conclusion: The Sad Tale of the Frog and the Scorpion.
Positives:
1. A well-researched and well-cited book that takes you into the always fascinating world of Jewish history.
2. As candid and forthright a book as you will find. Professor Sand provides solid and well-cited evidence in support of his arguments.
3. Enlightening and thought-provoking book to say the least.
4. An excellent complement to his best-selling book "The Invention of the Jewish People".
5. The myth that was the forced uprooting of the "Jewish people."
6. The book does a wonderful job of explaining how the dissemination of a formative historical mythos occurred. "Never did I accept the idea of the Jews' historical rights to the Promised Land as self-evident."
7. Clarifies some of the misunderstood points made in his previous book.
8. Professor Sand takes pride in his historical scholarship and it shows. The quest for primary sources. The author does a good job of letting the readers know what he does have a good handle on and what he doesn't.
9. Explains what really precipitated the establishment of the State of Israel.
10. The book achieves its goal of tracing the ways in which the "Land of Israel" was invented.
11. The book achieves the main goal of disparaging the official historiography of the Zionist Israeli establishment.
12. The notion of "homeland" in perspective. "It is important to remember that homelands did not produce nationalism, but rather the opposite: homelands emerged from nationalism." The concept of territorial entity.
13. Was the Land of Israel the ancestral land of the descendants of the children of Israel? A biblical perspective...
14. The great minds behind the Jewish connection with the Land of Israel. Fascinating history.
15. The history of the three main revolts. Their causes and results.
16. The factors that revitalized interest over the Holy Land for all three Abrahamic religions.
17. The evolution of Zionism including the Christian variety. The colonization of the Middle East. The main players and factors involved. The Balfour Declaration.
18. An interesting look at the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. The increasing use of the moral superweapon "historical right."
19. A condensed history of the Diaspora. Zionism versus Judaism.
20. The "redemption" of the land to "Judaization of the country". The 1947 resolution regarding the partition of Palestine. The acquisition of land. The three most significant moments in the long history of the occupations and the settlements in the occupied territories that most likely were decisive in shaping the future of Israel and its neighbors.
21. An excellent final chapter that summarizes the main points of this interesting book.
22. Excellent citations.
Negatives:
1. Lack of visual aids to assist the reader. As an example, maps would have added much value.
2. The book at times is repetitive.
3. No formal bibliography.
4. A cast of characters, timelines, even glossaries would have immensely assisted an American audience that may not be familiar with this fascinating history.
5. The book lacks panache. English is not the author's main language. This book is about substance over style.
In summary, this is a fascinating and enlightening book. I really enjoyed it and I must thank the author for the education. Professor Sand succeeds in educating the reader on the history of the "Land of Israel". It's a great complement to his previous best-selling book. I highly recommend it!
"The Invention of the Land of Israel" is the follow up to the fascinating and controversial "The Invention of the Jewish People". This excellent book serves as a complementary addition to the aforementioned book and fills gaps left behind. Historian and outspoken professor, Shlomo Sand does it again with this enlightening and educational book that reveals the history behind the Land of Israel. This 304-page book is composed of the following five chapters: 1. Making Homelands: Biological Imperative or National Property?, 2. Mytherritory: In the Beginning, God Promised the Land, 3. Toward a Christian Zionism: and Balfour Promised the Land, 4. Zionism Versus Judaism: The Conquest of "Ethnic" Space, and 5. Conclusion: The Sad Tale of the Frog and the Scorpion.
Positives:
1. A well-researched and well-cited book that takes you into the always fascinating world of Jewish history.
2. As candid and forthright a book as you will find. Professor Sand provides solid and well-cited evidence in support of his arguments.
3. Enlightening and thought-provoking book to say the least.
4. An excellent complement to his best-selling book "The Invention of the Jewish People".
5. The myth that was the forced uprooting of the "Jewish people."
6. The book does a wonderful job of explaining how the dissemination of a formative historical mythos occurred. "Never did I accept the idea of the Jews' historical rights to the Promised Land as self-evident."
7. Clarifies some of the misunderstood points made in his previous book.
8. Professor Sand takes pride in his historical scholarship and it shows. The quest for primary sources. The author does a good job of letting the readers know what he does have a good handle on and what he doesn't.
9. Explains what really precipitated the establishment of the State of Israel.
10. The book achieves its goal of tracing the ways in which the "Land of Israel" was invented.
11. The book achieves the main goal of disparaging the official historiography of the Zionist Israeli establishment.
12. The notion of "homeland" in perspective. "It is important to remember that homelands did not produce nationalism, but rather the opposite: homelands emerged from nationalism." The concept of territorial entity.
13. Was the Land of Israel the ancestral land of the descendants of the children of Israel? A biblical perspective...
14. The great minds behind the Jewish connection with the Land of Israel. Fascinating history.
15. The history of the three main revolts. Their causes and results.
16. The factors that revitalized interest over the Holy Land for all three Abrahamic religions.
17. The evolution of Zionism including the Christian variety. The colonization of the Middle East. The main players and factors involved. The Balfour Declaration.
18. An interesting look at the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. The increasing use of the moral superweapon "historical right."
19. A condensed history of the Diaspora. Zionism versus Judaism.
20. The "redemption" of the land to "Judaization of the country". The 1947 resolution regarding the partition of Palestine. The acquisition of land. The three most significant moments in the long history of the occupations and the settlements in the occupied territories that most likely were decisive in shaping the future of Israel and its neighbors.
21. An excellent final chapter that summarizes the main points of this interesting book.
22. Excellent citations.
Negatives:
1. Lack of visual aids to assist the reader. As an example, maps would have added much value.
2. The book at times is repetitive.
3. No formal bibliography.
4. A cast of characters, timelines, even glossaries would have immensely assisted an American audience that may not be familiar with this fascinating history.
5. The book lacks panache. English is not the author's main language. This book is about substance over style.
In summary, this is a fascinating and enlightening book. I really enjoyed it and I must thank the author for the education. Professor Sand succeeds in educating the reader on the history of the "Land of Israel". It's a great complement to his previous best-selling book. I highly recommend it!
April 4, 2024
باسمه
🔰 شلومو زند، تاریخدان اسرائیلی، در ایران بیشتر به خاطر کتاب «اختراع قوم یهود» شناخته شده. محور اون کتاب، نفی افسانه پیوستگی نژادی یهودیان باستان با یهودیان کنونی بود. هجمه صهیونیستها نسبت به اون کتاب باعث نگارش کتاب حاضر شد. محور این کتاب، بررسی ارتباط یهودیت و مفهوم سرزمین مقدس هست.
🔰 نویسنده ضد صهیونیسم هست؛ اما ضد اسرائیلی نیست. به صورت خاص اگه بخوام مقایسه کنم، حتی شاید از ایلان پاپه هم بیشتر اسرائیلی باشه (اصلاً کتاب با داستانی از حضور خودش در جنگ شش روزه و سقوط بیتالمقدس شروع میشه؛ گرچه سرباز وظیفه بوده و روایتش خیلی خیلی منفی هست). اتفاقاً وقتی نویسندهای با این مختصات، چنین اثرهایی داره، برای مخاطب غیرتخصصی بیشتر قابل توجه میشه! انصافاً هم نمیشه گفت آدم غیرمنصفی هست؛ در هر صورت اسرائیلی، اسرائیلی دیگه... به هر حال آشنایی با نظرات رهبران، کارگزاران، نخبگان اسرائیلی و مثلاً تفاوت چپ اسرائیلی و با چپ جهانی چیزهایی هستن که نگاه از درون شاید بهتر بتونه به فهمش کمک کنه.
🔰 نویسنده خداناباور هست؛ الزامی هم نیست که خواننده با این نگاهش موافق باشه تا روند تحلیل متن درست از آب در بیاد (درست مثل بخش قبل که لازم نیست نگاهمون به اسرائیل با نویسنده یکی باشه). اتفاقاً بخشهای چالشی اول کتاب برای مخاطب مسلمان، تا حد زیادی قابل پذیرش هم هست. دلیلش هم برمیگرده به اینکه کتاب مقدس یهودیان و مسیحیان مثل قرآن نیست؛ جدای از اعتقاد مسلمانان به تحریفات اون کتابها، ویژگی تاریخ داشتن عملاً باعث شده که مسیحیت صهیونیستی و یهودیت صهیونیستی از این کتابها به عنوان کتاب تاریخ و توجیه کننده اقدامات استفاده کنن (جالبه که از خلال بحث متوجه میشیم مسیحیت صهیونیستی نهایتاً دنبال رستگاری خودش و تغییر مذهب یهودیان در آخرالزمان هست)! خلاصه حرف اصلیش اینه که نباید با کتاب مقدس، معامله کتاب تاریخ بشه... از همین رهگذر هم به صورت تاریخی نشون میده چطور مفهوم سرزمین اسرائیل از هزاران سال قبل تا الآن شکل گرفت، تغییر پیدا کرد و توسط صهیونیسم به عنوان وطن ملی مورد سوءاستفاده قرار گرفت...
🔰 نکتهای که اول انتظارش رو نداشتم و فکر میکردم شاید اونقدرها هم مفید نباشه، ولی بعداً متوجه شدم چقدر مهم هست، بررسی تعاریف متعدد مفاهیم فرهنگی در طول زمان برای اقوام مختلف و طبقات مختلف بود! یه جمله قشنگی داشت که میگفت: «درسته که گذشته، حال رو تشکیل میده؛ اما حال هم میتونه شکل دیگهای به گذشته بده»! هیچوقت به این نکته توجه نکرده بودم که وطنی که در ترجمه فلان اثر باستانی میخونم، برای نویسنده اون میتونست مفهوم متفاوتی نسبت به حال حاضر داشته باشه... بررسی تغییرات مفهومی وطن، مرز، حق (تاریخی و تعیین سرنوشت) و اینکه دانش جغرافیا و تاریخ چقدر در اون نقش داشتن، از مواردی بود که بخشهای قابل توجهی از متن رو به خودش اختصاص داد؛ اما کاملاً برای تحلیل لازم بود. اینطوری میشه فهمید وطن مراد باستانیان چقدر با وطن صهیونیستی متفاوته!
🔰 کتاب، آوردههای زیادی برای خواننده داره؛ از بحثهای پایهای از قبیل معرفی ابزارهای فرهنگی تعریف جدید از اصطلاحات قدیمی در راستای منافع سیاسی (مثل زیارت، سرزمین اسرائیل، رستگاری زمین)، معرفی ابزارهای استعماری (مثل کیبوتص که اگه اینجا اینقدر جدی در موردش نخونده بودم، ایدهای بهتر از جلال در سفر به سرزمین عزراییل ازشون نداشتم) و معرفی ریشههای دانش استعماری (به صورت خاص شرق شناسی) گرفته تا بحثهای موردی از قبیل رد افسانه های دروغینی مثل فروش زمین به یهودیان با آمار مستند، فهم علت عدم پذیرش طرحهای بریتانیا و سازمان ملل توسط فلسطینیان با توضیح ابعاد هر کدوم، نمایش عملگرایی عجیب صهیونیسم و اثراتش در تثبیت موفقیت این حرکت یا حتی بلایی که نزدیک بود کاسب کاری روچیلد بر سر این روند استعماری بیاره!
🔰 این کتاب برای خودم اثباتی بلند در طول زمان بود که چرا «نه به اسرائیل» و چرا «آری به مقاومت»: شرط تملک سرزمین مقدس در کتب مقدس یهودیت (مذهبی)، منطق صهیونیسم در داشتن حق بر فلسطین (سیاسی) و استقرار سیاسی حال حاضر در مورد همزیستی با فلسطینیان (اجتماعی)؛ هر کدوم دلیلی بود برای اینکه چرا همچین موجودیت استعماری نژادپرستانهای نباید به این شکل ادامه پیدا کنه... صهیونیسم برای یهودیت مثل داعش هست برای اسلام...
✅ این کتاب، در بعضی موارد نیاز به اطلاعات پیشینی داره و چیزهایی رو فرض میگیره که میدونین و توضیح نمیده؛ لذا باید با دانستههای قبلی بهش مراجعه کنین. با این حال معنیش این نیست که منِ مخاطب عمومی نباید این کتاب رو بخونم یا اینکه تا زمانی که کامل مسلط نشدم نیام سراغش! خوندن این کتاب و امثال این کتاب برای داشتن موضع واقعی و بدردبخور در مقابل اسرائیل لازمه! چند روز قبل صحبتهایی در ��یل گزارش پیشرفت همین کتاب در مورد اینکه برای فلسطین چیکار میتونیم بکنیم شد؛ افزایش آگاهی نسبت به مسئله فلسطین یکی از اصلیترین این موارد بوده و هست. پس مطالعهاش به همه قابل توصیه هست...
🔻 یکروز پیش از روز قدس به اتمام رسید... لطفاً جهت شادی روح تمامی شهدای آزادی ملت فلسطین از اول تا آخر و به نیت پیروزی نهایی، صلواتی قرائت بفرمایید... 🇵🇸❤️
پ.ن: سنگینی نسبی متن در کنار دردآور بودن جنایات روزمره اسرائیل در غزه، ترکیب تلخی رو رقم زد... تلخه که ببینی این روند چه بلایی سر مردم فلسطین آورد... نیاز دارم یه مدتی سبک بخونم...
پ.پ.ن: بریدهمتنهای زیادی از این کتاب در بهخوان به اشتراک گذاشتم؛ اونا رو هم حتماً ببینین...
🔰 شلومو زند، تاریخدان اسرائیلی، در ایران بیشتر به خاطر کتاب «اختراع قوم یهود» شناخته شده. محور اون کتاب، نفی افسانه پیوستگی نژادی یهودیان باستان با یهودیان کنونی بود. هجمه صهیونیستها نسبت به اون کتاب باعث نگارش کتاب حاضر شد. محور این کتاب، بررسی ارتباط یهودیت و مفهوم سرزمین مقدس هست.
🔰 نویسنده ضد صهیونیسم هست؛ اما ضد اسرائیلی نیست. به صورت خاص اگه بخوام مقایسه کنم، حتی شاید از ایلان پاپه هم بیشتر اسرائیلی باشه (اصلاً کتاب با داستانی از حضور خودش در جنگ شش روزه و سقوط بیتالمقدس شروع میشه؛ گرچه سرباز وظیفه بوده و روایتش خیلی خیلی منفی هست). اتفاقاً وقتی نویسندهای با این مختصات، چنین اثرهایی داره، برای مخاطب غیرتخصصی بیشتر قابل توجه میشه! انصافاً هم نمیشه گفت آدم غیرمنصفی هست؛ در هر صورت اسرائیلی، اسرائیلی دیگه... به هر حال آشنایی با نظرات رهبران، کارگزاران، نخبگان اسرائیلی و مثلاً تفاوت چپ اسرائیلی و با چپ جهانی چیزهایی هستن که نگاه از درون شاید بهتر بتونه به فهمش کمک کنه.
🔰 نویسنده خداناباور هست؛ الزامی هم نیست که خواننده با این نگاهش موافق باشه تا روند تحلیل متن درست از آب در بیاد (درست مثل بخش قبل که لازم نیست نگاهمون به اسرائیل با نویسنده یکی باشه). اتفاقاً بخشهای چالشی اول کتاب برای مخاطب مسلمان، تا حد زیادی قابل پذیرش هم هست. دلیلش هم برمیگرده به اینکه کتاب مقدس یهودیان و مسیحیان مثل قرآن نیست؛ جدای از اعتقاد مسلمانان به تحریفات اون کتابها، ویژگی تاریخ داشتن عملاً باعث شده که مسیحیت صهیونیستی و یهودیت صهیونیستی از این کتابها به عنوان کتاب تاریخ و توجیه کننده اقدامات استفاده کنن (جالبه که از خلال بحث متوجه میشیم مسیحیت صهیونیستی نهایتاً دنبال رستگاری خودش و تغییر مذهب یهودیان در آخرالزمان هست)! خلاصه حرف اصلیش اینه که نباید با کتاب مقدس، معامله کتاب تاریخ بشه... از همین رهگذر هم به صورت تاریخی نشون میده چطور مفهوم سرزمین اسرائیل از هزاران سال قبل تا الآن شکل گرفت، تغییر پیدا کرد و توسط صهیونیسم به عنوان وطن ملی مورد سوءاستفاده قرار گرفت...
🔰 نکتهای که اول انتظارش رو نداشتم و فکر میکردم شاید اونقدرها هم مفید نباشه، ولی بعداً متوجه شدم چقدر مهم هست، بررسی تعاریف متعدد مفاهیم فرهنگی در طول زمان برای اقوام مختلف و طبقات مختلف بود! یه جمله قشنگی داشت که میگفت: «درسته که گذشته، حال رو تشکیل میده؛ اما حال هم میتونه شکل دیگهای به گذشته بده»! هیچوقت به این نکته توجه نکرده بودم که وطنی که در ترجمه فلان اثر باستانی میخونم، برای نویسنده اون میتونست مفهوم متفاوتی نسبت به حال حاضر داشته باشه... بررسی تغییرات مفهومی وطن، مرز، حق (تاریخی و تعیین سرنوشت) و اینکه دانش جغرافیا و تاریخ چقدر در اون نقش داشتن، از مواردی بود که بخشهای قابل توجهی از متن رو به خودش اختصاص داد؛ اما کاملاً برای تحلیل لازم بود. اینطوری میشه فهمید وطن مراد باستانیان چقدر با وطن صهیونیستی متفاوته!
🔰 کتاب، آوردههای زیادی برای خواننده داره؛ از بحثهای پایهای از قبیل معرفی ابزارهای فرهنگی تعریف جدید از اصطلاحات قدیمی در راستای منافع سیاسی (مثل زیارت، سرزمین اسرائیل، رستگاری زمین)، معرفی ابزارهای استعماری (مثل کیبوتص که اگه اینجا اینقدر جدی در موردش نخونده بودم، ایدهای بهتر از جلال در سفر به سرزمین عزراییل ازشون نداشتم) و معرفی ریشههای دانش استعماری (به صورت خاص شرق شناسی) گرفته تا بحثهای موردی از قبیل رد افسانه های دروغینی مثل فروش زمین به یهودیان با آمار مستند، فهم علت عدم پذیرش طرحهای بریتانیا و سازمان ملل توسط فلسطینیان با توضیح ابعاد هر کدوم، نمایش عملگرایی عجیب صهیونیسم و اثراتش در تثبیت موفقیت این حرکت یا حتی بلایی که نزدیک بود کاسب کاری روچیلد بر سر این روند استعماری بیاره!
🔰 این کتاب برای خودم اثباتی بلند در طول زمان بود که چرا «نه به اسرائیل» و چرا «آری به مقاومت»: شرط تملک سرزمین مقدس در کتب مقدس یهودیت (مذهبی)، منطق صهیونیسم در داشتن حق بر فلسطین (سیاسی) و استقرار سیاسی حال حاضر در مورد همزیستی با فلسطینیان (اجتماعی)؛ هر کدوم دلیلی بود برای اینکه چرا همچین موجودیت استعماری نژادپرستانهای نباید به این شکل ادامه پیدا کنه... صهیونیسم برای یهودیت مثل داعش هست برای اسلام...
✅ این کتاب، در بعضی موارد نیاز به اطلاعات پیشینی داره و چیزهایی رو فرض میگیره که میدونین و توضیح نمیده؛ لذا باید با دانستههای قبلی بهش مراجعه کنین. با این حال معنیش این نیست که منِ مخاطب عمومی نباید این کتاب رو بخونم یا اینکه تا زمانی که کامل مسلط نشدم نیام سراغش! خوندن این کتاب و امثال این کتاب برای داشتن موضع واقعی و بدردبخور در مقابل اسرائیل لازمه! چند روز قبل صحبتهایی در ��یل گزارش پیشرفت همین کتاب در مورد اینکه برای فلسطین چیکار میتونیم بکنیم شد؛ افزایش آگاهی نسبت به مسئله فلسطین یکی از اصلیترین این موارد بوده و هست. پس مطالعهاش به همه قابل توصیه هست...
🔻 یکروز پیش از روز قدس به اتمام رسید... لطفاً جهت شادی روح تمامی شهدای آزادی ملت فلسطین از اول تا آخر و به نیت پیروزی نهایی، صلواتی قرائت بفرمایید... 🇵🇸❤️
پ.ن: سنگینی نسبی متن در کنار دردآور بودن جنایات روزمره اسرائیل در غزه، ترکیب تلخی رو رقم زد... تلخه که ببینی این روند چه بلایی سر مردم فلسطین آورد... نیاز دارم یه مدتی سبک بخونم...
پ.پ.ن: بریدهمتنهای زیادی از این کتاب در بهخوان به اشتراک گذاشتم؛ اونا رو هم حتماً ببینین...
August 2, 2024
“Would anyone today consider encouraging an Arab demand to settle in the Iberian Peninsula to establish a Muslim state there simply because their ancestors were expelled from the region during the Reconquista?” Should the descendants of Puritans similarly return to England and declare an exclusionary theocratic state? Should Native Americans in the US “assume territorial possession of Manhattan and expel its white, black and Latino inhabitants?” Should Romans invade England and forcibly take back what they thought was theirs during the Roman Empire? Do you see how crazy is the Zionist idea of “Excuse me, but you are all living in my home that I clearly gave up thousands of years ago”?
The Zionists that landed in Jaffa didn’t act like the Jews that landed in London or New York City – the latter KNEW and ACCEPTED that they had to live together with other faiths in peace. The author believes that Israel is not “a worldwide Jewish nation” but instead is only an Israeli nation created and run by “an exploitative colonial elite.” Note that during the Middle Ages, when persecuted Jews were kicked out of different parts of Europe, they didn’t flock to Palestine to reclaim it reminding all they were personally chosen by God to live there. And note that some of the Jews who went post-WWII to Palestine only did so because the US had clear anti-immigrant legislation between 1924 and 1948. Note also that hardcore Brit Zionist Simon Schama chose to NOT immigrate to Israel even though he easily could have. I doubt Simon stayed in England just for the crappy cuisine or the warm beer.
Rarely Mentioned Facts: “The group suicide at Masada did not take place in the Land of Israel.” Ben Gurion stated he knew there was no Jewish exile, and he “regarded most of the territory’s local peasants as the authentic offspring of ancient Hebrews”. The author says the Bible never mentions Jerusalem, Hebron or Bethlehem being in the land of Israel, but only Samaria “and a number of adjacent areas.” Jerusalem was within Judea (remember the Judean People’s Front in “The Life of Brian”?). In the late 1800’s, “fewer than five thousand Jews lived in Palestine – most lived in Jerusalem compared to a population of more than 250,000 Christians and Muslims (p.117).” This figure alone tells you clearly “the Jewish religion’s (tenuous) tie to the Holy Land up to that time (late 1800’s).” Before Zionism arrived and pretended white settler-colonialism (land theft and murder) was still de jour, many famous real Jews lived peacefully and constructively among other faiths like “Philo of Alexandra, Josephus of Rome, the Babylonian Talmudic scholars, Saadia Gaon of Mesopotamia, and Maimonides of Egypt”. The author found writings (p.124) from the 9th century, about how rabbinical Jews refused to visit Zion. “During this period, no one prevented Jews from visiting or residing in Jerusalem as they pleased.” In 1165, Maimonides did visit Jerusalem and Hebron but peacefully settled in Egypt. Maimonides and billions of other humans throughout history easily proved that one CAN actually and peacefully settle somewhere w/o getting racist, settler-colonial, and having to run someone off their own land.
For decades, on TV and print we learn of the Crusades, where Christians in the Middle Ages intentionally took the onerous journey to the Holy Land as though it were the religious/pious thing to do – so why wasn’t there also a Jewish “Crusade” to the Holy Land – a journey “home” for Jews traveling together also for religious reasons? Between 12th and end of the 18th century you have “tens of thousands of Christian pilgrims” and only “few” Jews journeying to the Holy Land. Why? There are only thirty texts about Jewish pilgrimage between 135CE and the mid 19th century, while there are 3,500 reports of Christian pilgrimage between 333CE and 1878.
Fun Facts: Disraeli “initiated the conquest of Afghanistan in order to ward off the Russians.” “If in 1875, 10 percent of Africa was under European rule, by 1890 whites controlled more than 90 percent of the Dark Continent.” In 1903, Chamberlin offered Herzl Uganda free of charge for Jews to settle in. How thoughtful for England to offer Uganda and later Palestine (neither which actually belonged to the British) to Zionists. So racist to completely ignore how the natives of Uganda and Palestine felt about such intentional disempowerment. “In Zionism, the land replaced the Torah, and the sweeping worship of the future state replaced the strong adherence to God.” The joys of intentionally disregarding tradition.
We are taught the Kibbutz offered a marvelous egalitarian lifestyle but not that neither Arabs nor non-Jewish locals were allowed to join them. The KKK also offered an egalitarian lifestyle with the same restrictions. We were carefully taught the socialist origins of the Kibbutz, but not that “Zionist communal socialism served as one of the most effective mechanisms for maintaining a (racially) pure settler society.” Even so, Israeli settlements after 1967 left the Kibbutz model (p.227) and was based on a different “kind of ideology and on government financial assistance.” Israel’s Declaration of Independence intentionally made no mention of what Israel’s borders were – as with all who consider themselves above the law, the rules and boundaries are whatever you tell your abusees they are, on that particular day.
Albert Einstein wrote in 1930 that “Only direct cooperation with the Arabs can create a dignified and safe life …What saddens me is less the fact that the Jews are not smart enough to understand this, but rather that they are not just enough to want it.” Shlomo ends this book saying that “Zionism was not at all the continuation of Judaism but rather its negation. Indeed, it is for this reason that the latter rejected the former at an earlier period of history.” As well as the reason that Hasidim, the members of JVP, and millions of other Jews around the world reject Zionism today.
This was a great book which I’m really glad I’ve now read and reviewed. This was my second book of Shlomo’s I’ve reviewed – four more of his books to go for me. Kudos to the author.
The Zionists that landed in Jaffa didn’t act like the Jews that landed in London or New York City – the latter KNEW and ACCEPTED that they had to live together with other faiths in peace. The author believes that Israel is not “a worldwide Jewish nation” but instead is only an Israeli nation created and run by “an exploitative colonial elite.” Note that during the Middle Ages, when persecuted Jews were kicked out of different parts of Europe, they didn’t flock to Palestine to reclaim it reminding all they were personally chosen by God to live there. And note that some of the Jews who went post-WWII to Palestine only did so because the US had clear anti-immigrant legislation between 1924 and 1948. Note also that hardcore Brit Zionist Simon Schama chose to NOT immigrate to Israel even though he easily could have. I doubt Simon stayed in England just for the crappy cuisine or the warm beer.
Rarely Mentioned Facts: “The group suicide at Masada did not take place in the Land of Israel.” Ben Gurion stated he knew there was no Jewish exile, and he “regarded most of the territory’s local peasants as the authentic offspring of ancient Hebrews”. The author says the Bible never mentions Jerusalem, Hebron or Bethlehem being in the land of Israel, but only Samaria “and a number of adjacent areas.” Jerusalem was within Judea (remember the Judean People’s Front in “The Life of Brian”?). In the late 1800’s, “fewer than five thousand Jews lived in Palestine – most lived in Jerusalem compared to a population of more than 250,000 Christians and Muslims (p.117).” This figure alone tells you clearly “the Jewish religion’s (tenuous) tie to the Holy Land up to that time (late 1800’s).” Before Zionism arrived and pretended white settler-colonialism (land theft and murder) was still de jour, many famous real Jews lived peacefully and constructively among other faiths like “Philo of Alexandra, Josephus of Rome, the Babylonian Talmudic scholars, Saadia Gaon of Mesopotamia, and Maimonides of Egypt”. The author found writings (p.124) from the 9th century, about how rabbinical Jews refused to visit Zion. “During this period, no one prevented Jews from visiting or residing in Jerusalem as they pleased.” In 1165, Maimonides did visit Jerusalem and Hebron but peacefully settled in Egypt. Maimonides and billions of other humans throughout history easily proved that one CAN actually and peacefully settle somewhere w/o getting racist, settler-colonial, and having to run someone off their own land.
For decades, on TV and print we learn of the Crusades, where Christians in the Middle Ages intentionally took the onerous journey to the Holy Land as though it were the religious/pious thing to do – so why wasn’t there also a Jewish “Crusade” to the Holy Land – a journey “home” for Jews traveling together also for religious reasons? Between 12th and end of the 18th century you have “tens of thousands of Christian pilgrims” and only “few” Jews journeying to the Holy Land. Why? There are only thirty texts about Jewish pilgrimage between 135CE and the mid 19th century, while there are 3,500 reports of Christian pilgrimage between 333CE and 1878.
Fun Facts: Disraeli “initiated the conquest of Afghanistan in order to ward off the Russians.” “If in 1875, 10 percent of Africa was under European rule, by 1890 whites controlled more than 90 percent of the Dark Continent.” In 1903, Chamberlin offered Herzl Uganda free of charge for Jews to settle in. How thoughtful for England to offer Uganda and later Palestine (neither which actually belonged to the British) to Zionists. So racist to completely ignore how the natives of Uganda and Palestine felt about such intentional disempowerment. “In Zionism, the land replaced the Torah, and the sweeping worship of the future state replaced the strong adherence to God.” The joys of intentionally disregarding tradition.
We are taught the Kibbutz offered a marvelous egalitarian lifestyle but not that neither Arabs nor non-Jewish locals were allowed to join them. The KKK also offered an egalitarian lifestyle with the same restrictions. We were carefully taught the socialist origins of the Kibbutz, but not that “Zionist communal socialism served as one of the most effective mechanisms for maintaining a (racially) pure settler society.” Even so, Israeli settlements after 1967 left the Kibbutz model (p.227) and was based on a different “kind of ideology and on government financial assistance.” Israel’s Declaration of Independence intentionally made no mention of what Israel’s borders were – as with all who consider themselves above the law, the rules and boundaries are whatever you tell your abusees they are, on that particular day.
Albert Einstein wrote in 1930 that “Only direct cooperation with the Arabs can create a dignified and safe life …What saddens me is less the fact that the Jews are not smart enough to understand this, but rather that they are not just enough to want it.” Shlomo ends this book saying that “Zionism was not at all the continuation of Judaism but rather its negation. Indeed, it is for this reason that the latter rejected the former at an earlier period of history.” As well as the reason that Hasidim, the members of JVP, and millions of other Jews around the world reject Zionism today.
This was a great book which I’m really glad I’ve now read and reviewed. This was my second book of Shlomo’s I’ve reviewed – four more of his books to go for me. Kudos to the author.
August 20, 2023
Sand's political aims in this book are commendable: to remind us that Arab inhabitents of Palestine have rights and deserve democratic recognition, while excoriating the occupation of the West Bank. But I don't think he needed to tear down the Zionist ideal in order to reach his political goals, and I don't think he succeeded in tearing it down.
I can appreciate his claim that ancient Jews failed to recognize the modern sanctified term Eretz Israel as a political entity (it turns out that "Land of Israel" in the title are carefully chosen words), but he cannot erase the importance of places like Hebron in our history.
And we all know that religious anti-Zionists bitterly resented the appropriation of a Messianic goal by the Zionists and their way of elevating it to an immediate, secular goal. (For instance, that's one theme of Chaim Potok's best-selling novel The Chosen.) So Sands adds nothing by his history on that score. Still, his scholarship on the relationship of fanatic Judism radicalism to Judaism is interesting and worth taking in.
But the importance of the "land of Israel" to Jews doesn't depend on such political arguments. Sand can't make the Jewish yearning over the centuries to return to Palestine disappear; he actually documents many examples of that yearning meticulously. So he argues that for most Jews the yearning was "mystical" and "spiritual"—hence, in his estimation, unreal and irrelevant.
In short, I read and appreciate Sand's scholarly findings, but assign different weights to what he considers important or unimportant in the Jewish and Zionist traditions. At the same time, I am offended by some of the old-fashioned libels in the book. One example is Sands' characterization of Jewish immigration as a "colonization" of Palesstine—classic anti-Semitic talk. Another is his criticism of the Jewish victory in the War of Independence, which doesn't consider the violence on both sides and the complex international environment.
I can appreciate his claim that ancient Jews failed to recognize the modern sanctified term Eretz Israel as a political entity (it turns out that "Land of Israel" in the title are carefully chosen words), but he cannot erase the importance of places like Hebron in our history.
And we all know that religious anti-Zionists bitterly resented the appropriation of a Messianic goal by the Zionists and their way of elevating it to an immediate, secular goal. (For instance, that's one theme of Chaim Potok's best-selling novel The Chosen.) So Sands adds nothing by his history on that score. Still, his scholarship on the relationship of fanatic Judism radicalism to Judaism is interesting and worth taking in.
But the importance of the "land of Israel" to Jews doesn't depend on such political arguments. Sand can't make the Jewish yearning over the centuries to return to Palestine disappear; he actually documents many examples of that yearning meticulously. So he argues that for most Jews the yearning was "mystical" and "spiritual"—hence, in his estimation, unreal and irrelevant.
In short, I read and appreciate Sand's scholarly findings, but assign different weights to what he considers important or unimportant in the Jewish and Zionist traditions. At the same time, I am offended by some of the old-fashioned libels in the book. One example is Sands' characterization of Jewish immigration as a "colonization" of Palesstine—classic anti-Semitic talk. Another is his criticism of the Jewish victory in the War of Independence, which doesn't consider the violence on both sides and the complex international environment.
February 24, 2024
This read was, for the most part, a biblical study of the historical text (hence the term invention as the title was referring to) of the notion of an Israel state (and other things like the acceptability of killing other people on the land). Hence, being so, it was a new reading experience, which also proved difficult at times.
A-must to also read with this book is his earlier work, The Invention of the Jewish People.
A-must to also read with this book is his earlier work, The Invention of the Jewish People.
October 10, 2020
بالنسبة لشخص قرأ غالبية كتب د. عبد الوهاب المسيري، لا يضيف إلي الكثير .. ولكنه يستحق القراءة.
April 2, 2020
Although the author is an Israeli professor at Tel Aviv University, yet his reflections on the issue is worth teaching in the Palestinian and related-Arab curricula.
From a some-what boring first chapter about the historical development of the concept of "fatherland/homeland", in the 2nd chapter the author provides invaluable insights on the driving force among the Hebrew People of the Bible, which was the Torah and not the "land".
Then the author portrays the rejection of the Jews in the world of the concept of living in Palestine as something that doesn't have any particular interest or meaning for the Jews since the destruction of the Temple until today.
The last chapter is heartbreaking as it tracks the birth of the concept of a national home for the Jews first by the Evangelical Christians who wanted to push forward the coming of the Messiah and then by the Zionist movement.
A must read for every Palestinian.
From a some-what boring first chapter about the historical development of the concept of "fatherland/homeland", in the 2nd chapter the author provides invaluable insights on the driving force among the Hebrew People of the Bible, which was the Torah and not the "land".
Then the author portrays the rejection of the Jews in the world of the concept of living in Palestine as something that doesn't have any particular interest or meaning for the Jews since the destruction of the Temple until today.
The last chapter is heartbreaking as it tracks the birth of the concept of a national home for the Jews first by the Evangelical Christians who wanted to push forward the coming of the Messiah and then by the Zionist movement.
A must read for every Palestinian.
September 22, 2012
A worthy sequel of the "invention of the Jewish people". The central question is: was the territory known today as the land of Israel or Palestine- was it really during the centuries a focal point of hopes of jewish political independence? Of pilgrimage? And if it wasn't- when was it invented as such, by whom and for what purposes?
October 28, 2023
This is a really important follow up to Sand's "The Invention of the Jewish People." The way he examines how Zionists have used the Bible to misrepresent Jewish historical claims to Palestine is instructive. It's especially interesting to read about how those interpretations of the Bible evolved over the centuries, culminating with Zionist plans for colonizing Palestine. The afterword is also quite nice - it's an excavation of the university where he teaches - Tel Aviv University - to examine the history of that land, who lived there, how its people were ethnically cleansed from the area, and how it was built over and covered up with the university and Israeli museums recounting their distorted versions of history. There are some lines - especially towards the end of the book - that didn't sit well with me, but that doesn't detract from the rest of the volume, which I think is an important read for anyone interested in the history of Palestine.
September 29, 2024
let's get it over with: this is significantly less coherent, less visionary, and less provocative than the book that precedes it. it took me a while to finish, and not because i didn't have the time lol
Yet it was worth the while. Each chapter was on its own an accomplishment, even if the work as a whole lacked the spectacularity of its sister work. The atttention to land, to christianity, and to religious antizionism and critique of left-zionism was fascinating. I guess it was just a more eclectic "let's keep these good vibes going..." from the first book
the foreword and afterword were characteristically moving. I love Sand's appreciation of the emotional dimension of his subject: his good taste in terms of when you can slip in some poetry or indulge in some sentimentality
<3
Yet it was worth the while. Each chapter was on its own an accomplishment, even if the work as a whole lacked the spectacularity of its sister work. The atttention to land, to christianity, and to religious antizionism and critique of left-zionism was fascinating. I guess it was just a more eclectic "let's keep these good vibes going..." from the first book
the foreword and afterword were characteristically moving. I love Sand's appreciation of the emotional dimension of his subject: his good taste in terms of when you can slip in some poetry or indulge in some sentimentality
<3
May 12, 2025
Great great read.
Disgusting and unsurprising to learn that British elite class and politicians were partially responsible for the creation of the state of Israel.
Also a stark warning against nationalist and ethnocentric beliefs which are becoming worryingly prevalent in the UK.
I wish nothing but the worst for Zionists. May they all burn in hell for eternity and more.
Long live Palestine 🇵🇸
Disgusting and unsurprising to learn that British elite class and politicians were partially responsible for the creation of the state of Israel.
Also a stark warning against nationalist and ethnocentric beliefs which are becoming worryingly prevalent in the UK.
I wish nothing but the worst for Zionists. May they all burn in hell for eternity and more.
Long live Palestine 🇵🇸
April 18, 2020
Very insightful book on the history of jewish people and the beliefs, and events that led to the creation of the state of Israel by a current professor at the University of Tel Aviv, Israel. Must read for people trying to understand the middle east conflict.
June 1, 2024
An incredibly interesting look at the historical and religious context of the concept of Israel as well as its misconstruction by zionism and colonialism.
Some of the political standpoints are a bit outdated, some I disagree with but it's incredibly well researched and put together. It's easy enough to understand and follows a good structure for the most part so I was able to follow both points I was familiar and unfamiliar with.
Definitely worth the read; I learned quite a bit and have a list of books from the footnotes I now also want to read. It's a text you need to take your time with but I would argue that's fair.
Some of the political standpoints are a bit outdated, some I disagree with but it's incredibly well researched and put together. It's easy enough to understand and follows a good structure for the most part so I was able to follow both points I was familiar and unfamiliar with.
Definitely worth the read; I learned quite a bit and have a list of books from the footnotes I now also want to read. It's a text you need to take your time with but I would argue that's fair.
May 2, 2016
The best book I have read this year. A stunning work of history and memory, combining intellectual rigour with great moral courage. 'The Invention of the Land of Israel' meticulously deconstructs the founding mythology of the exclusive claim of the Jewish people to the land in Israel, as well as the supposed "yearning" of the Jewish people to return to their homeland, and asks to us to consider whether Israel is the answer to the Diaspora, or a part of it. Not for a moment endorsing any solution that would damage or threaten Israel or its people, Shlomo Sand is asking for a genuinely honest and open debate on the history of the conception and foundation of the State of Israel. Can Israel ever hope for peace with its neighbours and its Palestinian and Arab citizens while it continues to deny or ignore the terrible suffering inflicted on those people and their forefathers? Can a binational state emerge, including the West Bank and Gaza, where all citizens, whether Jewish or Arab or Druze or Christian, enjoy full equal civil and political rights? Above all this is a call for the people of Israel to save themselves from the ethnocentric narrative that has been woven into the very fabric of Israeli civil, political and cultural society, a narrative that is a threat to their democracy and even, Professor Sand posits, their future as a state.
March 20, 2017
"How could a man or a people seize a vast territory and keep out the rest of the human race except by a criminal usurpation since the action would rob the rest of mankind of the shelter and food that nature has given them all in common?"
A happy homeland of milk and honey, promised to the chosen is a fairy tale lie. The idea of homeland, the bond between soil and blood has become almost an indoctrinated philosophy. Treat humans as you will, but never question ones loyalty for their country, death for land, the only honorable death.
When in reality, it is unbearably sad, to think that soil has more worth than a soul. The cost and bloodshed, in creating these lies, inventing nationalistic pride at the cost of killing, ethnic cleansing a race of people carries such a deep offense to the earth. The earth, soil, land, was never meant to have blood spilled on it, especially when it has such abundance for all.
A happy homeland of milk and honey, promised to the chosen is a fairy tale lie. The idea of homeland, the bond between soil and blood has become almost an indoctrinated philosophy. Treat humans as you will, but never question ones loyalty for their country, death for land, the only honorable death.
When in reality, it is unbearably sad, to think that soil has more worth than a soul. The cost and bloodshed, in creating these lies, inventing nationalistic pride at the cost of killing, ethnic cleansing a race of people carries such a deep offense to the earth. The earth, soil, land, was never meant to have blood spilled on it, especially when it has such abundance for all.
April 5, 2014
I applaud Prof Sand's general effort here. The arguments & concepts presented are not simply compelling; but convincing. As one who tries to encourage others to read up on the subject though, it is very difficult to see how I can persuade others, who are not scholars, to finish it. The presentation reads like a lecture; rather than a narrative. I am also conscious that one aspect of the author's presentation of ideas is to refute arguments by another eminent historian (whose name I won't mention because he has enough books of his own & does not need more endorsements!) who disagrees with him. I would have preferred a simpler approach & left off the controversies as footnotes & endnotes. These are ideas that need to come out in the open; just, well, just not in this manner of writing.
November 24, 2022
Bardzo dobra książka, którą mógł napisać tylko Żyd, bo w ostry sposób rozlicza się z syjonizmem, uzasadnieniem istnienia państwa Izrael, całą koncepcją Erez Israel, prawem narodu żydowskiego do ziemii palestyńskiej. Kontynuacja ksiązki "Kiedy i jak wynaleziono naród żydowski". Pan Sand jest absolutnym wrzodem dla nacjonalistów żydowskich, gdyż w błyskotliwy i dość przystępny sposób obala mity założycielskie i nie potrafi pogodzić się z tym w jakim kraju żyje, z zasadami tego kraju oraz fałszywej historii wpajanej kolejnym pokoleniom. Takie zaprzeczenie Roszkowskiego, jakby pojawił się historyk mówiący: Polska nie ma specjalnie praw do Pomorza i Śląska, nie jesteśmy narodem wybranym a w sumie to nikt nas nie zdradził o świcie. To tego typu książka, polecam.
October 4, 2017
چرا اسرائیل جعلیست برای غیرمذهبی ها.
برخی نقلهایی که از موسسان اسراییل میاره واقعا عجیبه.
یک کتاب هم گویا سابق بر این نوشته به اسم چگونه خلق یهود اختراع شد.
تو اون کتاب هم با دیدی غیر مذهبی ادعای نژاد مشترک همه یهودی های دنیا رو پاسخ داده.
طبیعتا با بخش هایی از کتاب ، گاهی بخاطر مسائل مذهبی و گاهی هم بخاطر ملاحظات اخلاقی خودم مخالفم.
اگر کتاب تولد اسرائیل زیباکلام رو خوندید که منتشر کننده روایت صهیونیست هاست ، حتما این کتاب رو هم بخونید.
زیباکلام روشنفکر سکولار و استاد علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران و شلومو ساند روشنفکر لائیک و استاد تاریخ دانشگاه تل آویو.
برخی نقلهایی که از موسسان اسراییل میاره واقعا عجیبه.
یک کتاب هم گویا سابق بر این نوشته به اسم چگونه خلق یهود اختراع شد.
تو اون کتاب هم با دیدی غیر مذهبی ادعای نژاد مشترک همه یهودی های دنیا رو پاسخ داده.
طبیعتا با بخش هایی از کتاب ، گاهی بخاطر مسائل مذهبی و گاهی هم بخاطر ملاحظات اخلاقی خودم مخالفم.
اگر کتاب تولد اسرائیل زیباکلام رو خوندید که منتشر کننده روایت صهیونیست هاست ، حتما این کتاب رو هم بخونید.
زیباکلام روشنفکر سکولار و استاد علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران و شلومو ساند روشنفکر لائیک و استاد تاریخ دانشگاه تل آویو.
June 1, 2024
Shlomo Sand's "The Invention of the Land of Israel" is a follow-up of his "The Invention of the Jewish People", apparently filling in some gaps left by the latter (I have bought it but haven't read it yet).
The book starts with a contextualisation of the concept of nationalism in the ancient times, especially around the writings of historians describing attachment to their land, which was most noticeable in the Greek polis. This leads him to explain that people had no "nationalist" concept in the sense that would be developed in the XVIIIth/XIXth centuries, and so the inhabitants of "the land of Israel" did not share a common sense of belonging.
The author then does what a proper historian does best: he looks at the texts - here the Ancient Testament and associated texts, contextualises them, and makes an exegesis of them. This gives a lot of clarity on texts that are often presented and interpreted as actual historical texts, when they were - apparently - mostly apocryphal in regards to the events they mention. This lets us view the connection of the people of Hebraic faith with the "land of Israel" with a brand new perspective: that of migrants from Mesopotamia (Abraham told "by God" to pack up and go settle in Palestine), who were trying so hard not to mingle with local populations that it even became commands from their deity. Deity which, when they "returned from Egypt", commanded them to basically cleanse the land from its inhabitants and settle over them, like Europeans in North America (remember the texts are for the most part apocryphal - Shlomo Sand says that a lot of old parts from the Ancient Testament were written by the Hebrews during their Babylon exile, when they found themselves in contact with a way more advanced and urbanised civilisation than the one they had left behind in Palestine).
From there we move to the Hellenistic period, where the only actually Jewish state - that of the Hasmoneans, which seems to have been when most people in the area were (possibly forcefully) converted to the Hebraic religion.
Following this are the three Jewish uprisings against Rome (66-74 CE, 115-117 CE and 132-136 CE), at a time when Jewish proselytism was drawing more converts (i.e. Jews were not only from the Near/Middle-East anymore). The revolts and subsequent destruction of the temple became a major trauma in the Jewish psyché, which changed its attachment to the land into a more spiritual attachment to the Kingdom of Heaven, meaning there were no reasons for the Jews to want to go back to the "Holy Land".
This lasted while Christianity established itself as the dominant religion, taking over as a more proselytist one, until Islam came to contest it. Meanwhile, the Jewish people continued their lives, completely ignoring their "historical" land which both Christians and Muslims would make pilgrimages there.
This changed a bit under the influence of Christian Europe, but until the XIXth century, it would have apparently been preposterous for Jews - in the eyes of their religious figures at least - to claim to want to return to the "Holy land" or even more so to want to reclaim it. Protestant Christianity had however developed a rhetoric whereby the Jews' return to "their homeland" would precipitate the end of times and Christianity's ultimate salvation, and nowhere else than in Britain was this more prevalent - paving the way for the British mandate on Palestine, the Balfour declaration and all that followed.
Zionism was therefore born in an internally-hostile context, and only managed to develop itself because, among others, the rise of nationalism seriously affected the Jewish populations in Eastern Europe where they still lived in ghettos, in comparison with Western Europe where they were more integrated in the population (though still discriminated in places like France).
Following the author, we can see that for the most part, the settlement plans made completely disregarded the indigenous populations, be it the first British proposal - settle the Jews in... Uganda - or the Palestine settlement. The settlement of Jews in the Palestine mandate however was never a goal for them, until... the Western European countries closed their borders to them and forced them to settle somewhere else, that somewhere else ended up being Palestine.
Obviously the settlement of Jews in Palestine happened in a pretty colonial manner, with land being purchased from local powerful landlords and expelling local populations, but when the British disastrously withdrew (as they always do) post WW2, drama and ethnic cleansing did ensue, as Ilan Pappé so clearly tells in his The Ehtnic Cleansing of Palestine. Sand himself tells of the story of the Palestinian settlement of al-Sheikh Muwannis (now in the Tel Aviv agglomeration) and how little is known by the Israeli population of their history, as the school programs have been constructed, by both the right- and left-wing parties, to push the Jewish population into demanding the whole land for themselves.
This book has been overall really interesting and eye-opening, and even besides the obvious context of the ongoing conflict, I would recommend it also as a case in point of constructed nationalism.
The book starts with a contextualisation of the concept of nationalism in the ancient times, especially around the writings of historians describing attachment to their land, which was most noticeable in the Greek polis. This leads him to explain that people had no "nationalist" concept in the sense that would be developed in the XVIIIth/XIXth centuries, and so the inhabitants of "the land of Israel" did not share a common sense of belonging.
The author then does what a proper historian does best: he looks at the texts - here the Ancient Testament and associated texts, contextualises them, and makes an exegesis of them. This gives a lot of clarity on texts that are often presented and interpreted as actual historical texts, when they were - apparently - mostly apocryphal in regards to the events they mention. This lets us view the connection of the people of Hebraic faith with the "land of Israel" with a brand new perspective: that of migrants from Mesopotamia (Abraham told "by God" to pack up and go settle in Palestine), who were trying so hard not to mingle with local populations that it even became commands from their deity. Deity which, when they "returned from Egypt", commanded them to basically cleanse the land from its inhabitants and settle over them, like Europeans in North America (remember the texts are for the most part apocryphal - Shlomo Sand says that a lot of old parts from the Ancient Testament were written by the Hebrews during their Babylon exile, when they found themselves in contact with a way more advanced and urbanised civilisation than the one they had left behind in Palestine).
From there we move to the Hellenistic period, where the only actually Jewish state - that of the Hasmoneans, which seems to have been when most people in the area were (possibly forcefully) converted to the Hebraic religion.
Following this are the three Jewish uprisings against Rome (66-74 CE, 115-117 CE and 132-136 CE), at a time when Jewish proselytism was drawing more converts (i.e. Jews were not only from the Near/Middle-East anymore). The revolts and subsequent destruction of the temple became a major trauma in the Jewish psyché, which changed its attachment to the land into a more spiritual attachment to the Kingdom of Heaven, meaning there were no reasons for the Jews to want to go back to the "Holy Land".
This lasted while Christianity established itself as the dominant religion, taking over as a more proselytist one, until Islam came to contest it. Meanwhile, the Jewish people continued their lives, completely ignoring their "historical" land which both Christians and Muslims would make pilgrimages there.
This changed a bit under the influence of Christian Europe, but until the XIXth century, it would have apparently been preposterous for Jews - in the eyes of their religious figures at least - to claim to want to return to the "Holy land" or even more so to want to reclaim it. Protestant Christianity had however developed a rhetoric whereby the Jews' return to "their homeland" would precipitate the end of times and Christianity's ultimate salvation, and nowhere else than in Britain was this more prevalent - paving the way for the British mandate on Palestine, the Balfour declaration and all that followed.
Zionism was therefore born in an internally-hostile context, and only managed to develop itself because, among others, the rise of nationalism seriously affected the Jewish populations in Eastern Europe where they still lived in ghettos, in comparison with Western Europe where they were more integrated in the population (though still discriminated in places like France).
Following the author, we can see that for the most part, the settlement plans made completely disregarded the indigenous populations, be it the first British proposal - settle the Jews in... Uganda - or the Palestine settlement. The settlement of Jews in the Palestine mandate however was never a goal for them, until... the Western European countries closed their borders to them and forced them to settle somewhere else, that somewhere else ended up being Palestine.
Obviously the settlement of Jews in Palestine happened in a pretty colonial manner, with land being purchased from local powerful landlords and expelling local populations, but when the British disastrously withdrew (as they always do) post WW2, drama and ethnic cleansing did ensue, as Ilan Pappé so clearly tells in his The Ehtnic Cleansing of Palestine. Sand himself tells of the story of the Palestinian settlement of al-Sheikh Muwannis (now in the Tel Aviv agglomeration) and how little is known by the Israeli population of their history, as the school programs have been constructed, by both the right- and left-wing parties, to push the Jewish population into demanding the whole land for themselves.
This book has been overall really interesting and eye-opening, and even besides the obvious context of the ongoing conflict, I would recommend it also as a case in point of constructed nationalism.
January 19, 2026
AN ISRAELI HISTORIAN CRITIQUES ‘MYTHS’ IN THE ORIGINAL STORIES OF ISRAEL
Shlomo Sand is an Israeli Emeritus Professor of History at Tel Aviv University. He is often identified as one of the ‘new historians’ of Israeli historiography.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2012 book, “I felt a powerful sense of connection with the small land where I grew up and first fell in love and with the urban landscape that had shaped my character. Although never truly a Zionist, I was taught to see the country as a refuge in time of need for displaced and persecuted Jews who had nowhere else to go… At the time, however, I was unable to foresee the monumental changes that would come to reshape Israel as a result of its military victory and territorial expansion---changes that were wholly unrelated to Jewish suffering from persecution and that past suffering could certainly not justify.” (Pg. 7-8)
He continues, “I never dreamed Israel would legally annex East Jerusalem… and at the same time refrain from granting equal civil rights to one-third of the residents… I had no way of knowing that Israel would succeed in controlling such a large Palestinian population for decades, bereft of sovereignty… I never even considered the possibility that Israel would succeed in settling more than a half million people in the newly occupied territories and keeping them fenced off… from the local population, who would in turn be denied basic human rights… In short, I was wholly unaware I would spend most of my life living next door to a sophisticated and unique regime of military apartheid with which the ‘enlightened’ world, due in part to its guilty conscience, would be forced to compromise and… to support.” (Pg. 9-10)
He asserts, “all peoples possess a right of collective ownership over the defined territory in which they live and from which they generate a livelihood. No religious community with a diverse membership dispersed among different continents was ever granted such a right of possession.” (Pg. 14)
He explains, “I believe neither in the past existence of a Jewish people, exiled from its land, nor in the premise that the Jews are originally descended from the ancient land of Judea… to the dismay of anti-Semites, the Jews were never a foreign ‘ethnos’ of invaders from afar but rather an autochthonous population whose ancestors, for the most part, converted to Judaism before the arrival of Christianity or Judaism.” (Pg. 16) He continues, “The ‘Land of Israel’ of my true forefathers… whose origins and lives were embedded within the Yiddish culture of Eastern Europe… For most, the hastening of collective salvation was considered a transgression to be severely punished; for others, the Holy Land was largely an allegorical, intangible notion---not a concrete territorial site by an internal spiritual state. This reality was perhaps best reflected in the reaction of the Jewish rabbinate… to the birth of the Zionist movement.” (Pg. 19-20)
He goes on, “Because a united kingdom encompassing both ancient Judea and Israel never existed, a unifying Hebrew name for such a territory never emerged. As a result, all biblical texts employed the same pharaonic name for the region: the land of Canaan… In no text or archaeological finding do we find the term ‘Land of Israel’ used to refer to a defined geographic region… neither the successful Hasmonean revolt … nor the failed Zealot rebellion of 66-73 CE took place in the ‘Land of Israel’… this appellation was never used to refer to the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.” (Pg. 24-25) Later, he adds, “this mythological… formation of the ‘holy nation’ outside the land must be understood in conjunction with another. Not only did the authors of the Bible oppose the inhabitants of the land but also repeatedly expressed a deep hostility toward them. Most authors of the Bible loathed the local (‘popular’) tribes, who were tillers of the soil and idol worshippers; step by step, they lay the ideological foundation for the tribes’ eradication.” (Pg. 72)
He explains, “Many of today’s international borders were delineated in an arbitrary and incidental manner, and the delineation took place before the emergence of the nations in question… But the numerous territorial conflicts of the past did not result in prolonged world wars, and, in many cases, the primary impetus for armed struggle was not a craving for land itself. Prior to the growth of nationalism, territorial boundaries were never an issue about which no concessions could be made under any circumstances.” (Pg. 60)
He observes, “Perhaps it is fortunate that Zionist biblical scholars and Israeli archaeologists alike have recently begun to express doubts about the veracity of the narrative. Fieldwork has provided increasingly decisive evidence that the Exodus from Egypt never happened and that the land of Canaan was not suddenly conquered during the period identified in the Bible. These scholars are finding it reasonable to assume that the horror stories of mass murder were fabrications. It now appears likely that the local inhabitants… evolved into [a] … mixed population of Canaanites and Hebrews that later gave rise to two kingdoms: the large kingdom of Israel and the small kingdom of Judea.” (Pg. 75) Later, he summarizes, “In other words, in all the books of the Bible, the land of Canaan never served as a homeland for the ‘children of Israel,’ and for this reason. Among others, they never refer to it as ‘the Land of Israel.’” (Pg. 86)
He suggests, “It was not objective difficulties that had prevented Jews from immigrating to Zion over the previous sixteen hundred years, even if such difficulties did exist… History is much more prosaic. In contrast to the mythos so skillfully woven into the State of Israel’s Declaration of Independence, such a longing to settle in the land never truly existed. The powerful metaphorical yearning for total redemption that was linked to the place itself… bore no resemblance to human beings’ desire to rouse themselves and move to a known, familiar land.” (Pg. 117) Later, he adds, “Although settlement in Palestine presented economic difficulties, the main reason for the lack of immigrant settlers was much more banal: during the first half of the twentieth century, most of the world’s Jews and their progeny---whether ultraorthodox, liberal, or Reform, whether social democratic Bundists, socialists, and anarchists---did not regard Palestine as their land… they did not strive ‘in every successive generation to reestablish themselves in their ancient homeland.’ They did not even regard it as an appropriate place to ‘return’ to when that option was presented to them on a Protestant colonial golden platter… At the end of the day, it was the cruel and horrifying blows sustained by the Jews of Europe… that resulted in the establishment of the State of Israel.” (Pg. 175)
He asserts, “Although most Zionists well knew that Palestine had many local inhabitants, and periodically mentioned them in their writings, they did not construe their presence as meaning that the Land was not open for free colonization. Their fundamental consciousness on this point was consistent with the general climate of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: as far as the white man is concerned, the non-European world had for all intents and purposes become a space devoid of people, just as America had been desolate two hundred years earlier, prior to the arrival of the white man.” (Pg. 198)
He points out, “For years, Zionist rhetoric attempted to convince the world in general and the supporters of Zionism in particular that the Arabs of Palestine had fled in response to their leaders’ propaganda. Since the publication of studies by Simha Flapan, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, and others, however, we know this was not the case---the leaders of the local population did not recommend its departure… Many Palestinians fled out of fear, and the Jewish forces used a variety of methods to encourage them to do so… The debate that has played out in recent years, which was focused on determining whether the majority of Palestinians chose to leave ‘willingly’ or were in fact expelled, is important but not… of decisive significance. The debate over whether ‘ethnic cleansing’ was systematic or only spontaneous and partial … is less relevant then the fundamental ethical premise that families of refugees fleeing whizzing bullets and falling bombs are entitled to the basic human right to return to their homes once hostilities ended… In addition… the young State of Israel quickly enacted the … Law of Return… that enables all who can prove they are Jewish to immigrate to Israel and receive immediate and full citizenship… even if they subsequently choose to return to their country of origin.” (Pg. 231-232)
He notes, “The majority of settlements were built by local Palestinian laborers living under military occupation. They worked in the settlements by day… and returned to their villages in the evening… Unintentionally, and out of purely economic interests, Israel found itself turning into a typical plantation colony, with a peaceful and submissive population that lacked both citizenship and sovereignty, working for masters who possessed… a protective sense of paternalism.” (Pg. 248-249) He continues, “Despite never having known another regime, these young Palestinians quickly learned that very few people on earth at the end of the twentieth century shared the unusual situation of officially possessing no citizenship, no self-sovereignty, and no homeland, in a world where such status had become almost entirely infeasible and, in the view of most, wholly intolerable. Most Israelis were surprised at the new unrest and found it hard to understand.” (Pg. 249)
He concludes, “During every round of the national conflict over Palestine… Zionism has tried to appropriate additional territory… Although it is true that all modern homelands are cultural constructions, the withdrawal from national territory is nonetheless a virtually impossible undertaking, particularly when attempted by choice. Even if the world could be convinced that Zionism has really been … not about the conquest of an imagined ancestral land, the ethnoterritorial mythos that motivated the Zionist enterprise and constituted one of its most powerful conceptual bases is neither able nor willing to retreat. Ultimately it will certainly wither away like the rest of history’s nationalist mythologies… Will the demise of this mythos take with it Israeli society as a whole… or will it leave signs of life in its wake?... For quite some time now, the Palestinians have endured persistent suffering. This past and present suffering is what set the tone for this book…” (Pg. 258)
This book will interest those seeking critiques of the modern State of Israel and its policies
Shlomo Sand is an Israeli Emeritus Professor of History at Tel Aviv University. He is often identified as one of the ‘new historians’ of Israeli historiography.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2012 book, “I felt a powerful sense of connection with the small land where I grew up and first fell in love and with the urban landscape that had shaped my character. Although never truly a Zionist, I was taught to see the country as a refuge in time of need for displaced and persecuted Jews who had nowhere else to go… At the time, however, I was unable to foresee the monumental changes that would come to reshape Israel as a result of its military victory and territorial expansion---changes that were wholly unrelated to Jewish suffering from persecution and that past suffering could certainly not justify.” (Pg. 7-8)
He continues, “I never dreamed Israel would legally annex East Jerusalem… and at the same time refrain from granting equal civil rights to one-third of the residents… I had no way of knowing that Israel would succeed in controlling such a large Palestinian population for decades, bereft of sovereignty… I never even considered the possibility that Israel would succeed in settling more than a half million people in the newly occupied territories and keeping them fenced off… from the local population, who would in turn be denied basic human rights… In short, I was wholly unaware I would spend most of my life living next door to a sophisticated and unique regime of military apartheid with which the ‘enlightened’ world, due in part to its guilty conscience, would be forced to compromise and… to support.” (Pg. 9-10)
He asserts, “all peoples possess a right of collective ownership over the defined territory in which they live and from which they generate a livelihood. No religious community with a diverse membership dispersed among different continents was ever granted such a right of possession.” (Pg. 14)
He explains, “I believe neither in the past existence of a Jewish people, exiled from its land, nor in the premise that the Jews are originally descended from the ancient land of Judea… to the dismay of anti-Semites, the Jews were never a foreign ‘ethnos’ of invaders from afar but rather an autochthonous population whose ancestors, for the most part, converted to Judaism before the arrival of Christianity or Judaism.” (Pg. 16) He continues, “The ‘Land of Israel’ of my true forefathers… whose origins and lives were embedded within the Yiddish culture of Eastern Europe… For most, the hastening of collective salvation was considered a transgression to be severely punished; for others, the Holy Land was largely an allegorical, intangible notion---not a concrete territorial site by an internal spiritual state. This reality was perhaps best reflected in the reaction of the Jewish rabbinate… to the birth of the Zionist movement.” (Pg. 19-20)
He goes on, “Because a united kingdom encompassing both ancient Judea and Israel never existed, a unifying Hebrew name for such a territory never emerged. As a result, all biblical texts employed the same pharaonic name for the region: the land of Canaan… In no text or archaeological finding do we find the term ‘Land of Israel’ used to refer to a defined geographic region… neither the successful Hasmonean revolt … nor the failed Zealot rebellion of 66-73 CE took place in the ‘Land of Israel’… this appellation was never used to refer to the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.” (Pg. 24-25) Later, he adds, “this mythological… formation of the ‘holy nation’ outside the land must be understood in conjunction with another. Not only did the authors of the Bible oppose the inhabitants of the land but also repeatedly expressed a deep hostility toward them. Most authors of the Bible loathed the local (‘popular’) tribes, who were tillers of the soil and idol worshippers; step by step, they lay the ideological foundation for the tribes’ eradication.” (Pg. 72)
He explains, “Many of today’s international borders were delineated in an arbitrary and incidental manner, and the delineation took place before the emergence of the nations in question… But the numerous territorial conflicts of the past did not result in prolonged world wars, and, in many cases, the primary impetus for armed struggle was not a craving for land itself. Prior to the growth of nationalism, territorial boundaries were never an issue about which no concessions could be made under any circumstances.” (Pg. 60)
He observes, “Perhaps it is fortunate that Zionist biblical scholars and Israeli archaeologists alike have recently begun to express doubts about the veracity of the narrative. Fieldwork has provided increasingly decisive evidence that the Exodus from Egypt never happened and that the land of Canaan was not suddenly conquered during the period identified in the Bible. These scholars are finding it reasonable to assume that the horror stories of mass murder were fabrications. It now appears likely that the local inhabitants… evolved into [a] … mixed population of Canaanites and Hebrews that later gave rise to two kingdoms: the large kingdom of Israel and the small kingdom of Judea.” (Pg. 75) Later, he summarizes, “In other words, in all the books of the Bible, the land of Canaan never served as a homeland for the ‘children of Israel,’ and for this reason. Among others, they never refer to it as ‘the Land of Israel.’” (Pg. 86)
He suggests, “It was not objective difficulties that had prevented Jews from immigrating to Zion over the previous sixteen hundred years, even if such difficulties did exist… History is much more prosaic. In contrast to the mythos so skillfully woven into the State of Israel’s Declaration of Independence, such a longing to settle in the land never truly existed. The powerful metaphorical yearning for total redemption that was linked to the place itself… bore no resemblance to human beings’ desire to rouse themselves and move to a known, familiar land.” (Pg. 117) Later, he adds, “Although settlement in Palestine presented economic difficulties, the main reason for the lack of immigrant settlers was much more banal: during the first half of the twentieth century, most of the world’s Jews and their progeny---whether ultraorthodox, liberal, or Reform, whether social democratic Bundists, socialists, and anarchists---did not regard Palestine as their land… they did not strive ‘in every successive generation to reestablish themselves in their ancient homeland.’ They did not even regard it as an appropriate place to ‘return’ to when that option was presented to them on a Protestant colonial golden platter… At the end of the day, it was the cruel and horrifying blows sustained by the Jews of Europe… that resulted in the establishment of the State of Israel.” (Pg. 175)
He asserts, “Although most Zionists well knew that Palestine had many local inhabitants, and periodically mentioned them in their writings, they did not construe their presence as meaning that the Land was not open for free colonization. Their fundamental consciousness on this point was consistent with the general climate of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: as far as the white man is concerned, the non-European world had for all intents and purposes become a space devoid of people, just as America had been desolate two hundred years earlier, prior to the arrival of the white man.” (Pg. 198)
He points out, “For years, Zionist rhetoric attempted to convince the world in general and the supporters of Zionism in particular that the Arabs of Palestine had fled in response to their leaders’ propaganda. Since the publication of studies by Simha Flapan, Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, and others, however, we know this was not the case---the leaders of the local population did not recommend its departure… Many Palestinians fled out of fear, and the Jewish forces used a variety of methods to encourage them to do so… The debate that has played out in recent years, which was focused on determining whether the majority of Palestinians chose to leave ‘willingly’ or were in fact expelled, is important but not… of decisive significance. The debate over whether ‘ethnic cleansing’ was systematic or only spontaneous and partial … is less relevant then the fundamental ethical premise that families of refugees fleeing whizzing bullets and falling bombs are entitled to the basic human right to return to their homes once hostilities ended… In addition… the young State of Israel quickly enacted the … Law of Return… that enables all who can prove they are Jewish to immigrate to Israel and receive immediate and full citizenship… even if they subsequently choose to return to their country of origin.” (Pg. 231-232)
He notes, “The majority of settlements were built by local Palestinian laborers living under military occupation. They worked in the settlements by day… and returned to their villages in the evening… Unintentionally, and out of purely economic interests, Israel found itself turning into a typical plantation colony, with a peaceful and submissive population that lacked both citizenship and sovereignty, working for masters who possessed… a protective sense of paternalism.” (Pg. 248-249) He continues, “Despite never having known another regime, these young Palestinians quickly learned that very few people on earth at the end of the twentieth century shared the unusual situation of officially possessing no citizenship, no self-sovereignty, and no homeland, in a world where such status had become almost entirely infeasible and, in the view of most, wholly intolerable. Most Israelis were surprised at the new unrest and found it hard to understand.” (Pg. 249)
He concludes, “During every round of the national conflict over Palestine… Zionism has tried to appropriate additional territory… Although it is true that all modern homelands are cultural constructions, the withdrawal from national territory is nonetheless a virtually impossible undertaking, particularly when attempted by choice. Even if the world could be convinced that Zionism has really been … not about the conquest of an imagined ancestral land, the ethnoterritorial mythos that motivated the Zionist enterprise and constituted one of its most powerful conceptual bases is neither able nor willing to retreat. Ultimately it will certainly wither away like the rest of history’s nationalist mythologies… Will the demise of this mythos take with it Israeli society as a whole… or will it leave signs of life in its wake?... For quite some time now, the Palestinians have endured persistent suffering. This past and present suffering is what set the tone for this book…” (Pg. 258)
This book will interest those seeking critiques of the modern State of Israel and its policies
January 31, 2024
Is This An Overview?
Jews were settling in the Middle East since the 19th century, but Israel was made possible by early 20th mass immigration due to persecution, consequences of war, and anti-immigration policies of other states. Ideas of settling Palestine were a 19th century Christian Zionist invention. Supported by the British as a way to overcome colonialization limitations in the area, which would have given the British access to the area along with allies.
To take territory that would become Israel, a historic claim was made on the land. That the people owned the land who did not live on it for over two millennia, while denying the right to the land to those who lived on the land continuously for centuries. That the local people did not claim self-determination.
Sovereign ownership of the land was justified by a myth, that the land was the ancestral land in possession of the Jewish people. An exile was part of the myth, an exile that never happened. A myth of a people having a desire to return to the ancestral land, but when Jewish groups were expelled from other regions due to religious persecution, they did not historically want to seek refuge in the sacred land. Jews relocated to other locations.
What Myths Justified Israel?
Myths were created by disregarding history. To avoid the history of Judaism as a dynamic and proselytizing religion. To pretend that history does not contain various Judaized kingdoms that flourished. To forget the converted Jews by the Judaized kingdoms. Myths meant to disregard the territory’s local peasants.
There was no exile, nor was there yearning to return. Faithful Jews spread across the world. Jews were not limited to a small territory, but where to be found everywhere. Believers not through punishment.
The myth was developed to get Western sympathy, particularly Protestant Christian community who preceded Zionists ideas.
How Was The Concept Of Israel Formed?
The term Land of Israel came after the destruction of the Temple. With the area being defined as Palestina by the Roman Empire. It was during the 20th century that the Land of Israel became a theological concept due to the Protestants. It was the Puritans which interested the Bible as historical text before the Jewish Zionists. That was when the geonational concept was refined. Israel as a homeland came after nationalism, making sacrificing for the sake of homeland a much later interpretation and myth.
How Does Power Transforms A People?
Founded on fluid borders, which had the option of expanding. And did expand. Founded on ideas that Jews were persecuted who had nowhere else to go, but the territorial expansion and military victory that were not related to Jewish suffering.
Jews had been powerless and persecuted, but had become powerful and abused their power. The persecuted had become the persecutors.
They portrayed themselves as saviors rather than conquerors of foreign lands. There is debate whether Palestinians left willingly or because of the bombings. Many have justified Zionist colonization by the ancestral lands claim. Israel controls a large Palestinian population who have no sovereignty.
Caveats?
The focus is on how the concept of Israel came to be. The myths involved in making Israel, and breaking the myths. The practical reason for how Israel came to be. This is not a detailed political or social history of Israel.
Jews were settling in the Middle East since the 19th century, but Israel was made possible by early 20th mass immigration due to persecution, consequences of war, and anti-immigration policies of other states. Ideas of settling Palestine were a 19th century Christian Zionist invention. Supported by the British as a way to overcome colonialization limitations in the area, which would have given the British access to the area along with allies.
To take territory that would become Israel, a historic claim was made on the land. That the people owned the land who did not live on it for over two millennia, while denying the right to the land to those who lived on the land continuously for centuries. That the local people did not claim self-determination.
Sovereign ownership of the land was justified by a myth, that the land was the ancestral land in possession of the Jewish people. An exile was part of the myth, an exile that never happened. A myth of a people having a desire to return to the ancestral land, but when Jewish groups were expelled from other regions due to religious persecution, they did not historically want to seek refuge in the sacred land. Jews relocated to other locations.
What Myths Justified Israel?
Myths were created by disregarding history. To avoid the history of Judaism as a dynamic and proselytizing religion. To pretend that history does not contain various Judaized kingdoms that flourished. To forget the converted Jews by the Judaized kingdoms. Myths meant to disregard the territory’s local peasants.
There was no exile, nor was there yearning to return. Faithful Jews spread across the world. Jews were not limited to a small territory, but where to be found everywhere. Believers not through punishment.
The myth was developed to get Western sympathy, particularly Protestant Christian community who preceded Zionists ideas.
How Was The Concept Of Israel Formed?
The term Land of Israel came after the destruction of the Temple. With the area being defined as Palestina by the Roman Empire. It was during the 20th century that the Land of Israel became a theological concept due to the Protestants. It was the Puritans which interested the Bible as historical text before the Jewish Zionists. That was when the geonational concept was refined. Israel as a homeland came after nationalism, making sacrificing for the sake of homeland a much later interpretation and myth.
How Does Power Transforms A People?
Founded on fluid borders, which had the option of expanding. And did expand. Founded on ideas that Jews were persecuted who had nowhere else to go, but the territorial expansion and military victory that were not related to Jewish suffering.
Jews had been powerless and persecuted, but had become powerful and abused their power. The persecuted had become the persecutors.
They portrayed themselves as saviors rather than conquerors of foreign lands. There is debate whether Palestinians left willingly or because of the bombings. Many have justified Zionist colonization by the ancestral lands claim. Israel controls a large Palestinian population who have no sovereignty.
Caveats?
The focus is on how the concept of Israel came to be. The myths involved in making Israel, and breaking the myths. The practical reason for how Israel came to be. This is not a detailed political or social history of Israel.
December 14, 2023
Ufff qué libro. Lo encontré recomendado en una página y lo bajé. Cuando empecé a leerlo me enganchó de inmediato. Por supuesto no conocía a Shlomo Sand, pero supe que era el autor que Enrique Dussel cita en una clase suya que es medio viral en tik tok donde dice que la diáspora judía no existió y menciona a un “profesor de Tel Aviv”, pero no dice su nombre. Leyendo este libro y viendo cuál es el libro que antecede a este, confirmo que de él hablaba Dussel.
Como su título lo indica, el autor hace una exposición de cómo fue creada la idea de nación de Israel a partir de un exhaustivo análisis, muy, pero muy bien documentado (las notas bibliográficas son extensisimas). El concepto de nación y patria actuales nada tienen que ver con las naciones que sobre el territorio tenían lxs judíxs de hace 2 mil años, por lo que hablar de una relación con el actual Israel es un anacronismo. Lxs judíxs en la mayor parte de su historia post guerras judeo-romanas, poco o nulo deseo tuvieron de establecerse en Palestina, hasta antes del sionismo, pues les era más importante la ritualidad y conexión espiritual con la Tierra Santa que su posesión física. En contraste dicha obsesión es de origen cristiano, a partir d las peregrinaciones y cruzadas. Un proto sionismo surge en la Inglaterra separada del papado católico a partir de lecturas mesiánicas de la Biblia, accesible por la imprenta y la reforma. No es pues extraño que Inglaterra y EUA sean las piedras fundamentales de Israel. Los impulsos pro sionistas encuentran apoyo en el interés del imperio británico de tener un enclave en medio oriente, como tenían en Asia, sorteando el dominio otamano, que finalmente logra cuando cae. El sionismo en fin es un constructo ideológico construido en los paradigmas políticos de la Europa colonialista del siglo XIX, con todo lo que eso implica, que no tuvo apoyo en la población judía que veía en él una expresión del nacionalismo anti semita que no les consideraba ciudadanos de su tierra y una transgresión religiosa a la voluntad de Dios. Serán los progromos de la Rusia zarista y el Holocausto, ambas expresiones violentas del nacionalismo de época, las que terminen dando el impulso al sionismo. Las ideas orientalistas de la época (Edward Said) permitieron además a esta ideología europea pasar encima de lo que la población árabe originaria tenía que decir sobre su futuro lo que en esencia es el núcleo del conflicto actual, y que hoy, a finales del 2023, está alcanzado su violencia genocida más cruda en su historia.
El final me pareció hermoso en realidad. Sand recupera la memoria de al-Sheikh Muwannis, el pueblo árabe barrido por la guerra sobre el que se construyó la universidad de tel aviv donde trabaja. Un epílogo con una crítica y autor crítica durísima y cuyas imágenes del pueblo destruido y sus habitantes me conmovieron profundamente. Y es un cierre emotivo que conecta con la dura declaración del inicio: el autor rememora sus días en el ejército israelí durante la guerra y cómo sus compañeros torturan a un hombre mayor palestino hasta matarlo. Y que dicho acontecimiento es un peso moral que confiesa, aunque no participara en él.
Voya buscar su libro anterior. Él único pero es que hacen falta mapas y demás ayuda gráfica para sus lectores no familiarizados con la geografía del lugar.
Como su título lo indica, el autor hace una exposición de cómo fue creada la idea de nación de Israel a partir de un exhaustivo análisis, muy, pero muy bien documentado (las notas bibliográficas son extensisimas). El concepto de nación y patria actuales nada tienen que ver con las naciones que sobre el territorio tenían lxs judíxs de hace 2 mil años, por lo que hablar de una relación con el actual Israel es un anacronismo. Lxs judíxs en la mayor parte de su historia post guerras judeo-romanas, poco o nulo deseo tuvieron de establecerse en Palestina, hasta antes del sionismo, pues les era más importante la ritualidad y conexión espiritual con la Tierra Santa que su posesión física. En contraste dicha obsesión es de origen cristiano, a partir d las peregrinaciones y cruzadas. Un proto sionismo surge en la Inglaterra separada del papado católico a partir de lecturas mesiánicas de la Biblia, accesible por la imprenta y la reforma. No es pues extraño que Inglaterra y EUA sean las piedras fundamentales de Israel. Los impulsos pro sionistas encuentran apoyo en el interés del imperio británico de tener un enclave en medio oriente, como tenían en Asia, sorteando el dominio otamano, que finalmente logra cuando cae. El sionismo en fin es un constructo ideológico construido en los paradigmas políticos de la Europa colonialista del siglo XIX, con todo lo que eso implica, que no tuvo apoyo en la población judía que veía en él una expresión del nacionalismo anti semita que no les consideraba ciudadanos de su tierra y una transgresión religiosa a la voluntad de Dios. Serán los progromos de la Rusia zarista y el Holocausto, ambas expresiones violentas del nacionalismo de época, las que terminen dando el impulso al sionismo. Las ideas orientalistas de la época (Edward Said) permitieron además a esta ideología europea pasar encima de lo que la población árabe originaria tenía que decir sobre su futuro lo que en esencia es el núcleo del conflicto actual, y que hoy, a finales del 2023, está alcanzado su violencia genocida más cruda en su historia.
El final me pareció hermoso en realidad. Sand recupera la memoria de al-Sheikh Muwannis, el pueblo árabe barrido por la guerra sobre el que se construyó la universidad de tel aviv donde trabaja. Un epílogo con una crítica y autor crítica durísima y cuyas imágenes del pueblo destruido y sus habitantes me conmovieron profundamente. Y es un cierre emotivo que conecta con la dura declaración del inicio: el autor rememora sus días en el ejército israelí durante la guerra y cómo sus compañeros torturan a un hombre mayor palestino hasta matarlo. Y que dicho acontecimiento es un peso moral que confiesa, aunque no participara en él.
Voya buscar su libro anterior. Él único pero es que hacen falta mapas y demás ayuda gráfica para sus lectores no familiarizados con la geografía del lugar.
June 8, 2023
Fascinating and excruciatingly detailed examination of the myth of the Land of Israel. I find the ongoing genocidal attempts by the State of Israel against the Palestinians to be nearly unfathomable in the current global climate in which the pursuance of social justice is so visible and necessary. It stands to reason without the un-blinkered support of the USofA (under both political parties, mind you...) it is entirely possible the two-sate solution would have been implemented long ago and some semblance of detente could be established. Still, the long history of the Jews and the specter of the Nazi genocide of WWII looms large, and is well-utilized by Zionists and other apologists of the State of Israel for the continued aggression, violence, and oppression under the rubric of safety and defense. One wonders what would have happened if France hadn't facilitated the State of Israel acquiring the A-bomb in the 60's... Anyway. Sand is brilliant, and his historical references are vast and unassailable. Facts, people. Love them or join the Republican Party of the USofA. Still, this book spends a lot of time in Footnote Land, and that can turn off a lot of readers. Not me, but still, there are quite a large number here. And hardly of common academic parlance to those outside of Jewish History and Talmudic Studies. I was enthralled. Sand's points are clear, (not so) concise, and prove out the book's titular contention. Again, without US support, things could and would be different, at least for the most recent aspects of things Israeli, Zionist, Palestinian, "Middle Eastern", and then some. Terrorism, anyone? Israel as Terrorist? A region of the world that encapsulates much of what has gone wrong for humanity, and one we would be well-served to sort out soon-ish. Quite.
August 17, 2023
Yeah, another provocative book by Shlomo Sand, with a similar title to his main work, The Invention of the Jewish People.
Now it isn´t only the ethnic/racial continuity of the Jews during 2500 years that is disputed, but also the connection of the Jews with "Eretz Israel". By the way, the term "Eretz Israel" is also disputed here. To him, the modern idea of a "Eretz Israel" as an ancestral and continuing territory of the Jewish people is an ideological and political construct rather than a historical or geographical fact.
The second half of the book deals with Zionist colonization and modern Israel history. I believe that this was the idea of the book, to challenge the legitimacy of the Zionist Movement's endeavor to (re)build a Jewish homeland.
Overall, "The Invention of the Land of Israel" is a book that challenges conventional narratives about Jewish history and identity, questioning the idea of an unbreakable bond between the Jewish people and a specific land.
Worth reading, very well written and captivating book. To contest the ideas that Sand expounded in this work is up to historians of the Zionist Movement and Jewish History. If one is able to rebut Sand's arguments and offer a second point of view that proves the contrary to Sand's thesis that the modern idea of an "Eretz Israel" as an ancestral and continuing territory of the Jewish people is an ideological construct and politics, rather than a historical or geographical fact, that writes a book. I think it would be of great value.
A good book to complement this reading
"A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism" from Yakov M. Rabkin
Now it isn´t only the ethnic/racial continuity of the Jews during 2500 years that is disputed, but also the connection of the Jews with "Eretz Israel". By the way, the term "Eretz Israel" is also disputed here. To him, the modern idea of a "Eretz Israel" as an ancestral and continuing territory of the Jewish people is an ideological and political construct rather than a historical or geographical fact.
The second half of the book deals with Zionist colonization and modern Israel history. I believe that this was the idea of the book, to challenge the legitimacy of the Zionist Movement's endeavor to (re)build a Jewish homeland.
Overall, "The Invention of the Land of Israel" is a book that challenges conventional narratives about Jewish history and identity, questioning the idea of an unbreakable bond between the Jewish people and a specific land.
Worth reading, very well written and captivating book. To contest the ideas that Sand expounded in this work is up to historians of the Zionist Movement and Jewish History. If one is able to rebut Sand's arguments and offer a second point of view that proves the contrary to Sand's thesis that the modern idea of an "Eretz Israel" as an ancestral and continuing territory of the Jewish people is an ideological construct and politics, rather than a historical or geographical fact, that writes a book. I think it would be of great value.
A good book to complement this reading
"A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism" from Yakov M. Rabkin
March 7, 2020
This is an outstanding book.
Anyone writing about this topic is inevitably going to be branded partisan: it is a subject which hardly allows for middle ground or neutrality. For most of us, it is outside our knowledge or immediate concern and so we simply overlook it.
The polarity of the topic, however, is obvious when one reads through negative reviews on the web.
Perhaps I am naive, perhaps I am gullible, perhaps I am in my dotage. Very likely, all three.
I have had no strong connection with any aspect of the history or present circumstances of the Levant, other than wishing that life there could be more harmonious (how ingenuous that sounds!)
My reading of Shlomo Sand's book convinces me that, while it was of real moral importance to assist Jews (whoever they might have been or might be) after the nineteenth century Russian pogroms, and the Holocaust, there was no incipient right to occupation of this territory for the Jews who had voluntarily abandoned it fifteen hundred years earlier and never subsequently sought to reoccupy it as a homeland; and the people who occupied this territory from 1948 showed little common decency to the people who had lived there prior to 1948. I don't doubt that those two facts have significantly influenced later ill-advised Arab/Muslim aggression.
Anyone writing about this topic is inevitably going to be branded partisan: it is a subject which hardly allows for middle ground or neutrality. For most of us, it is outside our knowledge or immediate concern and so we simply overlook it.
The polarity of the topic, however, is obvious when one reads through negative reviews on the web.
Perhaps I am naive, perhaps I am gullible, perhaps I am in my dotage. Very likely, all three.
I have had no strong connection with any aspect of the history or present circumstances of the Levant, other than wishing that life there could be more harmonious (how ingenuous that sounds!)
My reading of Shlomo Sand's book convinces me that, while it was of real moral importance to assist Jews (whoever they might have been or might be) after the nineteenth century Russian pogroms, and the Holocaust, there was no incipient right to occupation of this territory for the Jews who had voluntarily abandoned it fifteen hundred years earlier and never subsequently sought to reoccupy it as a homeland; and the people who occupied this territory from 1948 showed little common decency to the people who had lived there prior to 1948. I don't doubt that those two facts have significantly influenced later ill-advised Arab/Muslim aggression.
September 10, 2023
Shlomo Sand's meticulously researched book is a thought-provoking exploration of the history of the Jewish people and the history of the State of Israel. Through his detailed accounts, he sheds light on the complexities of one of the world's major religions and its connection to the Holy Land. Sand fearlessly challenges prevailing myths propagated by the State of Israel, offering a necessary and fresh perspective.
As an impartial historian, Sand presents a clear-eyed view of Zionism, portraying it as a settler-colonial ideology that it really is, quite distinct from Judaism. His commitment to objectivity is evident throughout the book. By presenting the unvarnished truth, Sand allows readers to comprehend the suffering and hardships endured by Palestinians under the Israeli and Zionist state for decades.
This book is essential reading for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the Holy Land's intricate history and the urgent need for recognition and awareness of the history of the indigenous Palestinian people. Only then can there be new roads constructed for dialogue and empathy among the people inhabiting this region, offering hope for a future defined by justice and peace for all, and devoid of violence and lies.
As an impartial historian, Sand presents a clear-eyed view of Zionism, portraying it as a settler-colonial ideology that it really is, quite distinct from Judaism. His commitment to objectivity is evident throughout the book. By presenting the unvarnished truth, Sand allows readers to comprehend the suffering and hardships endured by Palestinians under the Israeli and Zionist state for decades.
This book is essential reading for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the Holy Land's intricate history and the urgent need for recognition and awareness of the history of the indigenous Palestinian people. Only then can there be new roads constructed for dialogue and empathy among the people inhabiting this region, offering hope for a future defined by justice and peace for all, and devoid of violence and lies.
June 25, 2020
Libro muy interesante e instructivo, continuación de "La invención del publo judío". Aunque se trata de una continuación, se puede leer sin haber leído el anterior. Empieza analizando minuciosamente la manera en que el nacionalismo crea la idea de "patria", para luego ir desmontando el modo en que lo hace el sionismo en particular. Es una tarea difícil, pero el autor lo hace muy bien, con un estilo y una perspectiva muy objetivos. El capítulo final es una crítica a la limpieza étnica llevada a cabo por el Estado de Israel, y es bastante emotivo, sin perder en ningún momento la objetividad.
Al igual que en el libro anterior, se trata de un trabajo intelectual por el cual la oposición al sionismo surge como un posicionamiento que se deriva necesariamente de una serie de análisis objetivos de la historia y la política israelíes.
Muy recomendable para quien esté interesado/a en la crítica al nacionalismo y/o en e conflicto árabe-israelí.
Al igual que en el libro anterior, se trata de un trabajo intelectual por el cual la oposición al sionismo surge como un posicionamiento que se deriva necesariamente de una serie de análisis objetivos de la historia y la política israelíes.
Muy recomendable para quien esté interesado/a en la crítica al nacionalismo y/o en e conflicto árabe-israelí.
Read
June 17, 2024Dieses Buch hat mir neue Perspektiven auf den Nahostkonflikt eröffnet, die mir vorher nicht so bewusst waren. Da ich allerdings nicht viel mehr als Schulwissen auf diesem Gebiet vorweisen kann, kann ich auch nicht beurteilen, ob der Autor in der Präsentation und Interpretation seiner Quellen selektiv vorgegangen ist bzw. inwiefern seine Schlüsse von denen der anderen Historiker:innen abweichen. Es wird zum Beispiel erwähnt, dass er dieselben Quellen auswertet, aber zu einem anderen Ergebnis kommt als seine Kolleg:innen, ohne hier tiefer ins Detail zu gehen, warum sich diese Schlussfolgerungen so unterscheiden. Ich habe weder den religiösen, noch den politischen oder geschichtlichen Background, um hier ein qualifiziertes Urteil zu fällen (deshalb gibt es auch keine Sternewertung), außer zu sagen, dass ich es persönlich spannend, bereichernd und augenöffnend fand.
April 16, 2024
A very deep and extensive study on the history of Eretz Israel or the Land of Israel, and how the concept was tweaked and used by Zionists for political reasons. The author deliberately acknolowledged the unjustice and atrocities towards the native Palestinians, which is clearly demonstrated by the current ongoing genocide of Gaza. Most of the ideas and concepts in this book I already read before in the books of El-Misseri. He was one of the great scholars of Zionism and Judaism. His writings clearly highlighted the colonozing nature of Zionism. I fully recommend his books to anyone interested in this topic.
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
https://www.elmessiri.com/
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
https://www.elmessiri.com/
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews