The post-Zionist era. Every dog of an idea has its day and as pioneer Zionism sees its last flame with religious-nationalist youth erecting cookie cutter shanty-town quality lodging on vacant hilltops on the Judean and Samarian ridgeline, the academic experts in ivory towers of the cost take up the mantra of the secular elite, of course ultimately in the British style name of “good trade” and the approbation of the wealthy in the West, to give Zionism its proper circumcision in this new dawn of the post, even the post-jew, the new jew who is not really a jew it is claimed, but some aberrant form of Caananite that somehow has to use all the posture and gesture at their disposal to posit a new idea of individual identity that dilutes tradition into white bread and mayonnaise. In certain versions it does an admirable job of framing liberalism, that motherhood and tired statement, into a tool of oppression, that encompasses anything from pink-washing to historical revisionism that posits a la-la land of secular leftism patched together from anyone from Wilhelm Reich, to Martin Buber to Allen Ginsberg…
Add to this is the non-stop, near visceral reaction of Israelis to the numerous men in black, religious ( Haredi) existence, seems to be surging at the same time that religious legislation is being less respected, universal conscription is being questioned, and public spending on dubious socialist utopian projects, pork barrel if the term can be permitted, showed new and profound forces being put into play and efforts to recapture past status or fill the void with a new dynamic take shape. All in all, Israelis with reason or not, feel unsettled and disconcerted by the growing, demographically, population of Haredim. An almost 2-state solution never envisioned, leaving the palestinians outside this peculiar love-triangle.
(see link at end)…Adar Cohen, current superintendent of civics education in the Education Ministry and who was informed on Sunday that he will not receive tenure, has sent a farewell letter to civics teachers in which he claimed to have been the target of a smear campaign.
…Education Ministry Director Dalit Shtauber told Cohen, who was still officially on trial period, that he has failed the trial and therefore will not receive tenure. The latest decision means he will have to leave the job.
The decision to rethink Cohen’s employment appears to have been influenced by an investigative report published in the Hebrew paper Makor Rishon and which said that Cohen is suspected of promoting “post-Zionist” textbooks into the Education Ministry syllabus and preventing the entry of textbooks that reflect accepted, traditional Zionist views.
“Four years ago I decided to run for the position of head of civics after much deliberation,” Cohen wrote in the letter, the contents of which were published by Channel 2 News on Sunday night. “The choice of public service, despite the options in academia and teaching, seemed the right thing to do, as an act of Zionism and of commitment to the state and society in which I live….( continued after break)
What is ironic, is that many of the assertions of the apostles and prophets of post-Zionism, bear a striking symmetry and cohesiveness with many in the religious community’s own condemnation of Israel militarism, and the cultural imperialism of the grandfather-clause of Zionism. In fact, their lifestyle is similar to the protest movement that camps out on tony Tel-Aviv sectors: anti-establishment, bohemian, collective ritual activity, demonstrative projections of a rejection of dominant culture through appearance. At least if one excludes the sexist, intolerant, misogynist, narrow-minded splinter sub-sects within; all in all both groups can and do pose at least a questioning of some central planks in the tricky notion of Israeli identity.
…“I came to you with shining eyes, and I received your back up, cooperation and support, as I did from many of my colleagues and from societies, organizations and many academics. You all know how much I loved my job, how I invested my energy and my time to no end, how I was fully committed to the system, and we made some achievements:
“We were not afraid to touch the sore, torn spots of Israeli society, and that is because the perception of our educational and pedagogical purpose was to nurse and contain, rather than divide and libel. That was the secret of our strength – the knowledge that whoever comes out of truth and confidence will be able to accommodate difficulties and doubts, even of those who are different than him. This is the secret charm of civics.
“Unfortunately, not everyone on a personal level was able to contain this complexity, and the arrows of certain people at the top were directed at me. Over the last two years a well-orchestrated smear campaign was directed at me from outside the Ministry. Hallucinatory and militant factors, who are not a part of the field of education and who made it their goal to finish my career, took every step possible to paint our work in education with political colors, in an attempt to denigrate me – but they actually meant to denigrate us all – those who are in charge of civics education. Unfortunately, many times I suffered from a lack of firm backing by the Ministry against the personal attacks on me.”…
…Cohen concluded his letter by saying, “Even if it has been decreed that I must leave, I am doing it standing tall and with my head held high. I believe in the righteousness of the Jewish-democratic common path through which we walked together. I thank you for all your support and encouragement, which were so important to me in this turbulent period and which came from a place of true faith in our just cause. I have no doubt that the hundreds of teachers from all sectors who have signed letters of support – all during the summer holidays – have not done so because of personal affection towards me, but from a sense that the destiny of our profession is at stake.”
Most post-Zionists, as the above featured Cohen, self-styled and in his natural habitat of the secular establishment, really have no inkling at all about the religious community and their valid claims which date long before Zionism was a twinkle or a fly in the eye of Herzl. As his own version of self-righteousness implies, Cohen also like this status of both enjoying the luxury of power that the bureaucracy affords and shouting off the deep-end in a kind of exhilaration of being the oppressed rebel, the underdog, the yid Voltaire speaking truth to power, where this “other” are villainous reactionaries and the post-Zionists are defiant, underground freedom lovers resisting being trampled on like grapes in a winery by powerful religious forces, a Spanish Inquisition while completely sidestepping the main point that he represents the interests of the colonizers and his opposition are the colonized, albeit sometimes willingly.
…Yisrael Hayom quoted passages from the textbook approved by Cohen that reflect the alleged “post-Zionist” approach. In one passage, the book says that there is a contradiction between Israel’s definition as a Jewish state and its obligation to give equal rights to all of its citizens. The book also says that “The establishment of Israel in 1948 turned the Arabs in the territory of Palestine-Israel from a majority into a minority.”
…It reportedly states elsewhere: “A relationship based on control could harm the freedom and equality of those who do not belong to the majority. This is especially true when the majority espouses a selective demographic policy, which entrenches its status over time.”
This passage is seen as critical of Israel’s Law of Return.
The controversial Yotzim L’derech Ezrachit” (On the Road to Civics) approved textbook says: “The Right is generally more cynical, and supports military solutions as important to national security.The Left is generally more humane, and believes in negotiations as the best way to solve conflicts.”
At another point, the book discusses the Nakba Law, which blocks state funding for groups that mourn the creation of the state. “Representatives from the Association for Civil Rights in Israel believe the law impinges on the rights of the Arab minority,” the book reads. “There are also other proposed laws that, if accepted, are likely to harm the Arab minority in Israel, such as the oath of loyalty to the state of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.”
In yet another controversial passage, the book tells students, “The Right attaches great importance to the nation and to national heritage… The Right tends to prefer those of the same nation over those of other nationalities and exalts values connected to nationality, and the Left is more supportive of humanism.”
Cohen’s dismissal was a victory for nationalist-Zionist forces within Israel, who welcomed the decision.Read More:http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158626#.UCFb-yqF80t
(see link at end)… fact that Israel policy towards the Palestinians is not driven by a discriminatory doctrine of racial superiority but by proven security concerns, such as columnist Akiva Eldar, who, in an article titled “Are Israel and apartheid South Africa really different?” dismissed the security realities, declaring: “As far as discriminatory practices are concerned, it’s hard to find differences between white rule in South Africa and Israeli rule,” or such as former attorney-general Michael Ben-Yair, who charged that Israel “enthusiastically chose to become a colonial society engaging in theft…. We established an apartheid regime.”
THIS IS but a small sampling of the assault on Israeli legitimacy from within its own civil society elites. Many examples abound of similar distortions, misrepresentations and exaggerations, of similar half-truths, non-truths and full-blooded fabrications from many other “intellectuals,” whether self-professed radical post-Zionists, or self-proclaimed “liberal” pro-Zionists.
The noxious nexus But more than a expression of the political predilections of those who articulate them, these derogatory attitudes towards Israel reflect a socio-cultural milieu, in which the personal and professional interests of its members impose a code of conformity to political correctness – irrespective of any divergence this may have from the facts. It is a code strictly enforced – not by any formal fiat, but by the consequences of any violation.
No deviation beyond “acceptable” limits is brooked, and any such “delinquency” is likely to have grave repercussions in terms of livelihood, promotion and even social acceptability of the “perpetrator.” Read More:http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.ca/2012_01_01_archive.html