Hamas attacks southern Israel

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Jews that formed Israel were largely European. Founder of Likud and 6th president of Israel, Menachem Begin, born in present day Belarus. 1st prime minister of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, born in Poland. 1st president of Israel, Chaim Weizmann, born in Russia. We have to pass three decades to find a president born in the Levant, Yitzhak Navon. Modern Israel is largely a product of European Jews.

They were born in Europe, but they weren't European.

Thessaloniki is the only city with continued Jewish majority for hundreds of years. That it lost 90% of its Jewish population because of Nazis doesn't take away from its value as a Jewish motherland (the city was called the mother of Israel). It's not an insistence of Israel being in Europe. If a city like Thessaloniki existed in south Africa it would be an equally better option. However, it's position between Europe and Asia would make it a powerhouse for development.

Other cities also had such nicknames, Vilnius was called 'Yerushalayim de Lita' (Jerusalem of Lithuania), but ultimately, the city meant nothing at all to the vast majority of the world's Jewry, other than the 10% of its inhabitants that remained alive, which isn't even 0.1% of Jews. Israel is the homeland of *all* Jews, and is in common to them all. Thessaloniki is the temporary home of, by that point, a few thousands.

[PointOfViewGun]

They were born in Europe, but they weren't European.

That would be only true genetically which has no value in this discussion.

Other cities also had such nicknames, Vilnius was called 'Yerushalayim de Lita' (Jerusalem of Lithuania), but ultimately, the city meant nothing at all to the vast majority of the world's Jewry, other than the 10% of its inhabitants that remained alive, which isn't even 0.1% of Jews. Israel is the homeland of *all* Jews, and is in common to them all. Thessaloniki is the temporary home of, by that point, a few thousands.

You can try to downplay it all you like. It doesn't change the relevancy of Thessaloniki as a much better option compared to Jerusalem. Israel is the religious and ancestral location at best. You can call it a homeland but that doesn't grant them default rights to the level of displacing others either. Jews and Arabs share common ancestry and they are the last people to invoke ancestry against each other on Earth. There is no such thing as a temporary home as well. You're invoking ridiculously empty ideologies to defend your position.

[Kyriakos]

The nazis had killed almost all the jewish people here - by the way, in ww2 the jewish population of Greece massively took part in the war as soldiers, because they had reason to identify the country as a home and not a threat.
Of course even if the nazis hadn't murdered almost all of them, Greece was among the victors of the war and wouldn't be giving territory away.

On a tangent, all should know that Nike isn't spelled with an iota. Phillip II named his daughter that to commemorate the annexation of Thessaly in the final amphictyonic league war, against Phokis. One of Alexander's epigonoi, general Kassander, married Thessalonike and founded the city.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

That would be only true genetically which has no value in this discussion.

It would be true in every sense but geography. Jews are not Europeans, and the Europeans spent well over a thousand years making sure they're aware of that fact.

You can try to downplay it all you like. It doesn't change the relevancy of Thessaloniki as a much better option compared to Jerusalem. Israel is the religious and ancestral location at best. You can call it a homeland but that doesn't grant them default rights to the level of displacing others either. Jews and Arabs share common ancestry and they are the last people to invoke ancestry against each other on Earth. There is no such thing as a temporary home as well. You're invoking ridiculously empty ideologies to defend your position.

It's you who is invokig rediculous ideas here. You want to move the worlds entire Jewish population to a singular city, despite 99.9% of them having absolutely nothing to do with this city, with most of them likely never having even heard of it.
You simply do not understand just how important Jerusalem is to Jews. And I don't think you ever could, frankly.

[PointOfViewGun]

It would be true in every sense but geography. Jews are not Europeans, and the Europeans spent well over a thousand years making sure they're aware of that fact.

Yes, bigoted Europeans do try to sell a distorted and purified European image. Doesn't make it true. Israel was largely established and ruled earlier by European Jews who were likely more different to the Jews of Levant than the Arabs living in the area.

It's you who is invokig rediculous ideas here. You want to move the worlds entire Jewish population to a singular city, despite 99.9% of them having absolutely nothing to do with this city, with most of them likely never having even heard of it.
You simply do not understand just how important Jerusalem is to Jews. And I don't think you ever could, frankly.

Before Zionism Thessaloniki had more Jews than the Palestinian region. Today Thessaloniki sits in a province with 65% more land than the entirety of Israel. Clear, its not a singular city. It's a laughable claim to say that practically no Jewish person has any ties to the city or that most of them don't know the city at all. You're pushing it there. Jerusalem is important to the Jews, Muslims and Christians. Doesn't make any of them have default claim over it based on religious reasons.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Yes, bigoted Europeans do try to sell a distorted and purified European image. Doesn't make it true. Israel was largely established and ruled earlier by European Jews who were likely more different to the Jews of Levant than the Arabs living in the area.

Again, just being born in Europe did not make them European.

Before Zionism Thessaloniki had more Jews than the Palestinian region. Today Thessaloniki sits in a province with 65% more land than the entirety of Israel. Clear, its not a singular city.

Ah yes, I'm sure the Greeks would just happily hand over all of Macedonia. It's not like it's important to them or anything. Lol. Lmao, even.

It's a laughable claim to say that practically no Jewish person has any ties to the city or that most of them don't know the city at all. You're pushing it there.

How, exactly, is it laughable? Thessaloniki had around 70,000 Jews. The worldwide Jewish population at the time was estimated at around 16.6 million. The vaaaaast majority of Jews had absolutely nothing to do with Thessaloniki. It's laughable to claim that a city that held less than half a percentage of worldwide Jewry at some point, and close to 0 by the time the establishment of Israel came to be seriously discussed, should somehow become the homeland of all Jews.

Jerusalem is important to the Jews, Muslims and Christians. Doesn't make any of them have default claim over it based on religious reasons.

It's the only place important to *all* Jews. The movement, Zionism, is called after it, for Jerusalem is Zion. Christians and Muslims have plenty of others. I'm also talking about Jews as a people here, not just the religion.

[PointOfViewGun]

Again, just being born in Europe did not make them European.

Who said being born them in Europe made them European? Jews didn't come out of a Jew factory in Poland based on designs from Jerusalem and got shipped to various parts of the world. Jews have been living in Europe for centuries dating as far back as two thousand years ago.

Ah yes, I'm sure the Greeks would just happily hand over all of Macedonia. It's not like it's important to them or anything. Lol. Lmao, even.

How about you use the same argument for the Arabs of Palestine?

How, exactly, is it laughable? Thessaloniki had around 70,000 Jews. The worldwide Jewish population at the time was estimated at around 16.6 million. The vaaaaast majority of Jews had absolutely nothing to do with Thessaloniki. It's laughable to claim that a city that held less than half a percentage of worldwide Jewry at some point, and close to 0 by the time the establishment of Israel came to be seriously discussed, should somehow become the homeland of all Jews.

16.6 million? You might wanna dial that down quite a bit. When there were 70 thousand Jews living in Thessaloniki there were about a dozen or so thousand Jews living in Jerusalem. If the vast majority of Jews had absolutely nothing to do with Thessaloniki the same was true for Jerusalem other than religious ties. At the time, more Jews were accustomed to Thessaloniki than they were of Jerusalem. You seem to be forgetting that we're discussing the idea that Jews had no other option save Jerusalem.

It's the only place important to *all* Jews. The movement, Zionism, is called after it, for Jerusalem is Zion. Christians and Muslims have plenty of others. I'm also talking about Jews as a people here, not just the religion.

Jerusalem's importance to Jews is based on religion and for nothing else. Christians and Muslims have plenty others? What kind of idiotic argument is that? Sigh... You really have no logical and coherent position to stand on.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Who said being born them in Europe made them European? Jews didn't come out of a Jew factory in Poland based on designs from Jerusalem and got shipped to various parts of the world. Jews have been living in Europe for centuries dating as far back as two thousand years ago.

Indeed, Jews did not come out of Poland. They came out of the land of Israel. Neither them themselves nor those around them considered them European.

How about you use the same argument for the Arabs of Palestine?

It is indeed the same argument, thank you for noticing. So how is it better to do it there and not in Jerusalem, if the result is still conflict? Is it because you have a reason to dislike Greece?

16.6 million? You might wanna dial that down quite a bit.

No, I don't think I will. "In 1939, the global population of Jewish people worldwide peaked at around 16.6 million. "

When there were 70 thousand Jews living in Thessaloniki there were about a dozen or so thousand Jews living in Jerusalem. If the vast majority of Jews had absolutely nothing to do with Thessaloniki the same was true for Jerusalem other than religious ties. At the time, more Jews were accustomed to Thessaloniki than they were of Jerusalem.

It's not just religious ties. When Jews marry, they say 'If I forget thee o Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.". They also say this every year on Tisha B'av, and when they bless their food after every meal. Every year on Passover and on Yom Kippur, they say "Next year in Jerusalem!".
Jerusalem is mentioned constantly. There is no Jew who doesn't know of Jerusalem, regardless of where in the world they are. It is mentioned in the Tanakh (the Jewish bible) 669 times, and an additional 154 times as 'Zion'.
What does Thesalonikki mean to a Jew from France? absolutely nothing. Has a Jew from Ethiopia ever heard of it? nope. Does a Kaifeng Jew in far away China think often of it often, or even once in his lifetime? No. And yet they all know Jerusalem, and they all yearn for it.

You seem to be forgetting that we're discussing the idea that Jews had no other option save Jerusalem.

Since when?

Jerusalem's importance to Jews is based on religion and for nothing else. Christians and Muslims have plenty others? What kind of idiotic argument is that? Sigh... You really have no logical and coherent position to stand on.

It is important for cultural and historic reasons too. It is where the Jewish identity formed, the land of our ancestors, the only place where Jews had their own state, where they are native. It is a zeal present in Jews both secular and religious. The early Zionists were virtually all secular, and yet they chose Zion above all else.

[PointOfViewGun]

Indeed, Jews did not come out of Poland. They came out of the land of Israel. Neither them themselves nor those around them considered them European.

Awful standards to use. Most of those people that didn't consider Jews as Europeans didn't consider many other European communities as well. Doesn't change the fact that they were all European.

It is indeed the same argument, thank you for noticing. So how is it better to do it there and not in Jerusalem, if the result is still conflict? Is it because you have a reason to dislike Greece?

Never have I seen someone spin something so much. Wow. Bravo. I'm not the one employing double standards here. You are. I didn't argue Arabs have a default ownership of Palestine because they claim some distant ancestry to the people inhabiting the lands thousands of years ago.

No, I don't think I will. "In 1939, the global population of Jewish people worldwide peaked at around 16.6 million. "

Ah, jumping to 1939, sure. By then, your precious Jerusalem still had a comparable size of Jewish population to Thessaloniki.

Since when?

Since you claimed that Israel's current location was the only non-random one.

It is important for cultural and historic reasons too. It is where the Jewish identity formed, the land of our ancestors, the only place where Jews had their own state, where they are native. It is a zeal present in Jews both secular and religious. The early Zionists were virtually all secular, and yet they chose Zion above all else.

No, Jews don't have some kind of hive mind that fills them with the desire to be in Jerusalem. Zionism can only be grounded on religious zeal disguised as distorted national ideology. Current location of Israel is not the only places a Jewish state existed in history.

[Jozam]

Seems like you'd have to have a Nazi's definition of "Europeanness" to argue Ashkenazis (66-85% of Jews) aren't European. They're 50% genetically European on average and their non-European ancestors first arrived in Europe 1-2 thousand years ago. Even the British commented on the European character of the Zionist settlers in Palestine in contrast to the indigenous Arab population.

The Jewish National Home is no longer an experiment. The growth of its population has been accompanied by political, social and economic developments along the lines laid down at the outset. The chief novelty is the urban and industrial development. The contrast between the modern democratic and primarily European character of the National Home and that of the Arab world around it is striking. The temper of the Home is strongly nationalist. There can be no question of fusion or assimilation between Jewish and Arab cultures.

—Peel, W. et al. (1937), "Report of the Palestine Royal Commission"

It's not like "native" Europeans appeared ex nihilo in Europe. Their ancestors migrated from Asia/Africa just like any Ashkenazi, doesn't make the Dutch or Irish any less European.

[Ludicus]

[/URL]Yeah, it is.
"Recently the Hamas politician Fathi Hammad went on TV to proclaim that the organization’s next step would be to declare a caliphate— The caliphate would be based in Jerusalem."

"Recently" means: in 2013. Are there any other examples? Hamas wants a state, not a Caliphate. The importance of understanding the differences between...

Following its gruesome terrorist attack in Israel, Hamas has frequently been compared, or even equated to the Islamic State. Although it may be politically tempting to equate Hamas, IS, al-Qaeda and other Islamist groups, it is not conducive to a nuanced understanding of how these groups actually operate.

First... idea of a caliphate governed by Sharia-based law and uniting the world’s Muslims under a single leader, thereby breaking existing nation-state borders, has historically been central to both al-Qaeda and IS, although the two organizations have differed in their views regarding the envisioned timing of declaring such a caliphate. Whereas for al-Qaeda and IS the aspired liberation of Palestine and the fight against Israel represent first and foremost a strategic opportunity to unite the world’s Muslims in a global struggle, for Hamas, the Palestinian struggle constitutes the sole, primary focus.

Second, Hamas’ cooperation with Iran and a variety of Iran-sponsored Shi’ite Islamist actors, including the Lebanese Hezbollah, is particularly problematic for al-Qaeda and IS as Sunni Muslim, Salafi-jihadi actors, not least because both al-Qaeda and IS have clashed directly and indirectly with several of these Shi’ite actors in the Syrian Civil War.

Third, a major concern for al-Qaeda and IS, which condemn democracy as a Western and un-Islamic concept, has been Hamas’ participation in the 2006 legislative elections in the Palestinian territories and its subsequent power-sharing agreement with its secular rival Fatah. These decisions were already at the time sharply opposed by al-Qaeda, which viewed it as a step of Hamas towards accepting the existing nation-state order and, thereby, indirectly accepting, and legitimizing Israel’s existence.

Fourth, both al-Qaeda and IS have previously criticized Hamas for what they view as its failure to implement appropriate Sharia-based legislation in Gaza.

Last, Hamas’ earlier repression of Salafi-jihadi factions in Gaza, some of them known for their supportive stance towards al-Qaeda or IS, has equally raised objections. Examples include the al-Qaeda-leaning Jaysh al-Ummah and the pro-IS Jama’at Ansar al-Dawla al-Islamiyya fi Bayt al-Maqdis.
These various divides can thus explain why Hamas has long perceived both al-Qaeda and IS primarily as threats, rather than as potential allies.

Lastly, although al-Qaeda and IS have long wished to gain an operational foothold in the Palestinian arena, it remains unclear to what extent they will be able to do so within the near future. Not only is Hamas opposed to both organizations, but an additional, major challenge is that all states that directly border Israel and the Palestinian territories – Egypt, Lebanon (including the Hezbollah as the dominant actor in the South), Jordan and Syria – are hostile towards them

---
Majority of Germans against Israel's war on Gaza: Survey

Some 61% of Germans oppose Israel’s military offensive in Gaza, only 33% support it.
In a poll conducted in November, after an Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack, 62% of Germans had said they were supporting Israel’s military action in Gaza.
At that time, only 31% of Germans were against Israel's military offensive.

Miller went to great lengths to justify the massacres Israel continues to commit in Gaza. Department Press Briefing – June 06, 2024

--

Neither them themselves nor those around them considered them European.

Not entirely true. What matters is the fact that of Israeli Jews alive today, 80% were born in Israel. That said, The Jewish identities of European Jews: What, why and and how?...

What makes a Jewish identity?

Throughout 2021, JPR researchers Professor Sergio DellaPergola and Dr Daniel Staetsky analysed the responses of over 16,000 European Jews in 12 European countries who participated in the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights survey conducted by JPR and Ipsos in 2018. The result of their hard work and innovative approach is ‘The Jewish identities of European Jews’, a study into the what, why and how of Jewish identity.
The report finds some extraordinary differences and similarities between Jews across Europe, including:

• European Jews are much more likely to see themselves as a religious minority than an ethnic one, yet fewer than half of all Jewish adults across Europe light candles most Friday nights;
• Jewish identity is strongest in Belgium, the UK, France, Austria, Spain and Italy, and weakest in Hungary and Poland;
• The memory of the Holocaust and combating antisemitism played a more important part in people’s Jewish identity than support for Israel, belief in God or charitable giving. Rising perceptions of antisemitism may have stimulated a stronger bond with Jewish peoplehood;
• Only about half of all Jews in Europe identify with a particular denomination, although there are significant differences at the national level;
• Higher proportions of younger Jews are religiously observant than older Jews;
• Belgium has the largest proportion of Jews identifying as Orthodox in its Jewish population, followed by the UK, Italy, France and Austria;
• Spain has the largest proportion of Jews identifying as Reform/Progressive, followed by Germany and the Netherlands;
• Levels of attachment to the European Union among European Jews are higher than, or very similar to, levels of attachment among their fellow citizens in the countries in which they live

[Ludicus]

Double post

[nhytgbvfeco2]

@Ludi, 2023, not 2013. Come on, dude.

Awful standards to use. Most of those people that didn't consider Jews as Europeans didn't consider many other European communities as well. Doesn't change the fact that they were all European.

What makes them European? Geography?

Never have I seen someone spin something so much. Wow. Bravo. I'm not the one employing double standards here. You are. I didn't argue Arabs have a default ownership of Palestine because they claim some distant ancestry to the people inhabiting the lands thousands of years ago.

lol, what a lame attempt you've made here. I think you realise that too. You've addressed nothing that was said.

Ah, jumping to 1939, sure. By then, your precious Jerusalem still had a comparable size of Jewish population to Thessaloniki.

What year was I supposed to go for..?
As for the population, so? How does that relate to my argument?

Since you claimed that Israel's current location was the only non-random one.

Thessaloniki is random to 99.5% of worldwide Jews back then, 99.9% by 1948 when Israel was founded.

No, Jews don't have some kind of hive mind that fills them with the desire to be in Jerusalem. Zionism can only be grounded on religious zeal disguised as distorted national ideology. Current location of Israel is not the only places a Jewish state existed in history.

It's the only location that a Jewish state existed, yes. There existed a couple states that were Jewish by religion (Himyar, Semien, Khazaria albeit the degree of conversion is dubious at best), but if we talk of Jews as a people then there was no other.
Yes, the religious zeal of atheist Jews drove them to Zion, while religious Jews were driven away precisely by their religion for a long time, some still are. As I said before, I don't think you could understand.

Seems like you'd have to have a Nazi's definition of "Europeanness" to argue Ashkenazis (66-85% of Jews) aren't European. They're 50% genetically European on average and their non-European ancestors first arrived in Europe 1-2 thousand years ago. Even the British commented on the European character of the Zionist settlers in Palestine in contrast to the indigenous Arab population.



It's not like "native" Europeans appeared ex nihilo in Europe. Their ancestors migrated from Asia/Africa just like any Ashkenazi, doesn't make the Dutch or Irish any less European.

Even after 2 millenia, Ashkenazi Jews maintained either half or majority middle eastern genetics. We do not identify as Europeans, Europeans do not see us as Europeans and never have, and we do not want to be Europeans. Who are you to put this label on us?

[PointOfViewGun]

What makes them European? Geography?

What makes the Spanish, Italian, British, Greek and French all European?

lol, what a lame attempt you've made here. I think you realise that too. You've addressed nothing that was said.

It's more like you're failing to reconcile with a criteria you put forward so you're doing your best to obfuscate that.

What year was I supposed to go for..?
As for the population, so? How does that relate to my argument?

Pre-1900s is more like it. Before the modern Zionism movement started to flood the Levant with European Jews which by your numbers still didn't manage to make Jerusalem more of a Jewish city compared to Thessaloniki.

Thessaloniki is random to 99.5% of worldwide Jews back then, 99.9% by 1948 when Israel was founded.

Based on a made up senseless criteria, sure.

It's the only location that a Jewish state existed, yes. There existed a couple states that were Jewish by religion (Himyar, Semien, Khazaria albeit the degree of conversion is dubious at best), but if we talk of Jews as a people then there was no other.
Yes, the religious zeal of atheist Jews drove them to Zion, while religious Jews were driven away precisely by their religion for a long time, some still are. As I said before, I don't think you could understand.

I understand that you keep making up criteria as if it makes biblical sense to keep your narrative alive but don't expect people to eat it up. If you can't accept a simple fact of history like the location of Israel not being the only site of any Jewish state, yes, I could not understand whatever you're trying to cook up here.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

What makes the Spanish, Italian, British, Greek and French all European?

They identify themselves as such, and other Europeans also see them as such.

It's more like you're failing to reconcile with a criteria you put forward so you're doing your best to obfuscate that.

What criteria was that? You said Jerusalem was a bad choice because it caused conflict, among other reasons, and then proposed Thesalonniki, but later admitted it too would cause conflict. You've beaten your own argument.

Pre-1900s is more like it. Before the modern Zionism movement started to flood the Levant with European Jews which by your numbers still didn't manage to make Jerusalem more of a Jewish city compared to Thessaloniki.

Want to go for pre-1900? That's fine. At the censuses of 1844, 1846, 1853, 1857, 1862, 1864, 1866, 1869, 1874, and every census after 1882 Jews were either a plurality or the majority of the population of Jerusalem.
As for your quip about the 1900's, by 1917 the Jewish population of Thessaloniki was 52,000, 17% of the city. By this point, Jews are the plurality of the population of Jerusalem.

Based on a made up senseless criteria, sure.

You're trying to argue Thessaloniki is important to all Jews because about 0.5% of them lived there, with most of the rest not knowing of it.

I understand that you keep making up criteria as if it makes biblical sense to keep your narrative alive but don't expect people to eat it up. If you can't accept a simple fact of history like the location of Israel not being the only site of any Jewish state, yes, I could not understand whatever you're trying to cook up here.

Do you not understand that a Jewish state and a state that is Jewish mean different things?

[Jozam]

Even after 2 millenia, Ashkenazi Jews maintained either half or majority middle eastern genetics. We do not identify as Europeans, Europeans do not see us as Europeans and never have, and we do not want to be Europeans. Who are you to put this label on us?

Whether or not Ashkenazis are European is a question of history and genetics not popular opinion. Middle-Easterners universally reject Ashkenazis as Middle-Eastern, but I doubt you'd take that as proof Ashkenazis aren't Middle-Eastern.

Anyway, I already gave the example of the British Peel Commission Report which described Ashkenazi settlers as European, so it's not even true that Ashkenazis aren't seen as European. In fact, I don't know any Europeans who aren't crazy neo-Nazis who wouldn't accept Ashkenazis like Paul Rudd and Natalie Portman as fellow Europeans. Even the 23&Me genetic test (made by Jewish/European-Americans) categorizes Ashkenazis as a European population.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[sumskilz]

Whether or not Ashkenazis are European is a question of history and genetics not popular opinion. Middle-Easterners universally reject Ashkenazis as Middle-Eastern, but I doubt you'd take that as proof Ashkenazis aren't Middle-Eastern.

Anyway, I already gave the example of the British Peel Commission Report which described Ashkenazi settlers as European, so it's not even true that Ashkenazis aren't seen as European. In fact, I don't know any Europeans who aren't crazy neo-Nazis who wouldn't accept Ashkenazis like Paul Rudd and Natalie Portman as fellow Europeans. Even the 23&Me genetic test (made by Jewish/European-Americans) categorizes Ashkenazis as a European population.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The methodology used by 23andMe (IBD segments at least 5 cM in length) is calibrated to determine where one’s ancestors were from roughly 500 years ago. Despite this, Levantine people still get false positive indications of being Ashkenazi. This is because multiple smaller IBD segments from further back can by chance recombination end up next to each other which looks the same as more recent common ancestry.

Jewish ethnogenesis occurred in the highlands of the Southern Levant, specifically in the Kingdom of Judah, which outlasted the tribally affiliated northern Kingdom of Israel. The oldest extra-biblical evidence of the Israelite people is the Merneptah Stele which dates to c. 1208 BCE. Hebrew is a Canaanite language, arguably more accurately referred to as a Canaanite dialect, which is mutually intelligible with Phoenician.

Ashkenazi ethnogenesis dates back about a thousand years to when Jews from Italy settled in the Rhine Valley. These Italian Jews were descended from a population of Levantine Jewish men, many of whom took Southern European wives in the first generation.

I would argue that at the time that the Jewish diaspora was initially established in Southern Europe, there was no meaningful distinction between Europe and the Middle East/North Africa. In many ways, both genetic and cultural, Southern Europe had as much or more in common with the rest of the Mediterranean than with Northern Europe. It was really the Muslim conquest that created a semi-permeable border between the cultural spheres we think of as European versus Middle Eastern (although more properly MENA).

Ashkenazi Jews were never fully accepted as European until after the Holocaust, and at the time political Zionism came into being, the majority were far from fully assimilated, especially in the Pale of Settlement where most Ashkenazi immigrants to Ottoman and Mandate Palestine originated. In the US, where Ashkenazi Jews are now fully assimilated, it seems that we are considered white by those who are hostile to white people and non-white by those who are hostile to non-white people. Although, most people don’t care either way about such things.

All that being said, I don’t get the point of the discussion. The reality, which nhytgbvfeco2 points out is that Eretz Israel is and was the only place to which all Jews had some attachment, regardless of whether or not you consider Ashkenazi Jews to be a European or partially Europeanized subset. It also doesn’t change anything. The vast majority of Jews reasonably consider themselves to be indigenous to the Southern Levant. The modern state of Israel already exists, and it isn’t going anywhere in the foreseeable future. The idea that a Jewish state could have been established in Thessaloniki seems particularly absurd.

[Legio_Italica]

All that being said, I don’t get the point of the discussion. The reality, which nhytgbvfeco2 points out is that Eretz Israel is and was the only place to which all Jews had some attachment, regardless of whether or not you consider Ashkenazi Jews to be a European or partially Europeanized subset. It also doesn’t change anything. The vast majority of Jews reasonably consider themselves to be indigenous to the Southern Levant. The modern state of Israel already exists, and it isn’t going anywhere in the foreseeable future. The idea that a Jewish state could have been established in Thessaloniki seems particularly absurd.

Excluding overt racism, I think most arguments asserting the illegitimacy of the state of Israel or of (Ashkenazi) Jews can only be understood in the context of Arab nationalism or Islamic fundamentalism. Jews can live anywhere, but if they live in Israel, they are invasive colonizers to be expelled. Israel can exist anywhere outside the Middle East, but if it exists in the historical land of Israel, it is a heinous foreign occupation of rightful Muslim lands.

The most unfortunate aspect of this for people who consider themselves Palestinian, in my view, is that their identity exists purely in opposition to Israel, rather than the other way around. No one outside the region would care about the Palestinian cause if it were not a proxy for anti-western and anti-American political interests. Palestinian jihadists would be less inclined to maximize the death and suffering of their own people without the need to justify their existence to international supporters.

It’s questionable whether the Palestinian cause would exist at all today if Israel did not, which makes it all the more tragic that so many are committed to die violently for the cause, whether in battle or as collateral. Few who today call it a question of human rights would particularly care if Egypt or a neighboring Arab state controlled the territory “from the river to the sea.” The Jews, on the other hand, will probably always long for a return to Jerusalem to rebuild their temple as they always have, even if Israel ceased to exist tomorrow. I still think that makes them the horse to bet on in the region, and that’s also why peace with Israel is key to a peaceful and prosperous Middle East. For those committed to preventing that outcome, the success of the Abraham Accords means attacks like we saw on October 7 are the only viable counter-strategy.

[Jozam]

The methodology used by 23andMe (IBD segments at least 5 cM in length) is calibrated to determine where one’s ancestors were from roughly 500 years ago. Despite this, Levantine people still get false positive indications of being Ashkenazi. This is because multiple smaller IBD segments from further back can by chance recombination end up next to each other which looks the same as more recent common ancestry.

Jewish ethnogenesis occurred in the highlands of the Southern Levant, specifically in the Kingdom of Judah, which outlasted the tribally affiliated northern Kingdom of Israel. The oldest extra-biblical evidence of the Israelite people is the Merneptah Stele which dates to c. 1208 BCE. Hebrew is a Canaanite language, arguably more accurately referred to as a Canaanite dialect, which is mutually intelligible with Phoenician.

Ashkenazi ethnogenesis dates back about a thousand years to when Jews from Italy settled in the Rhine Valley. These Italian Jews were descended from a population of Levantine Jewish men, many of whom took Southern European wives in the first generation.

I would argue that at the time that the Jewish diaspora was initially established in Southern Europe, there was no meaningful distinction between Europe and the Middle East/North Africa. In many ways, both genetic and cultural, Southern Europe had as much or more in common with the rest of the Mediterranean than with Northern Europe. It was really the Muslim conquest that created a semi-permeable border between the cultural spheres we think of as European versus Middle Eastern (although more properly MENA).

Ashkenazi Jews were never fully accepted as European until after the Holocaust, and at the time political Zionism came into being, the majority were far from fully assimilated, especially in the Pale of Settlement where most Ashkenazi immigrants to Ottoman and Mandate Palestine originated. In the US, where Ashkenazi Jews are now fully assimilated, it seems that we are considered white by those who are hostile to white people and non-white by those who are hostile to non-white people. Although, most people don’t care either way about such things.

All that being said, I don’t get the point of the discussion. The reality, which nhytgbvfeco2 points out is that Eretz Israel is and was the only place to which all Jews had some attachment, regardless of whether or not you consider Ashkenazi Jews to be a European or partially Europeanized subset. It also doesn’t change anything. The vast majority of Jews reasonably consider themselves to be indigenous to the Southern Levant. The modern state of Israel already exists, and it isn’t going anywhere in the foreseeable future. The idea that a Jewish state could have been established in Thessaloniki seems particularly absurd.

Ashkenazis being distinct from and having been in conflict with other European populations doesn't change the historical and genetic fact that they're a European population. Ashkenazis are genetically 50% European and their non-European ancestors first arrived in Europe thousands of years ago. It's hard to see how they're not European unless you subscribe to some convoluted racist theory of who is or isn't a "real" European.

If you go back far enough all Europeans migrated from Asia or Africa, doesn't mean the Swiss are "really" Asian or African instead of European. You're just picking an arbitrary point in time and going "from this point on, all future arrivals to Europe are foreigners and not real Europeans." It's completely illogical and not persuasive to anyone whose mind isn't clouded by ideology.

[sumskilz]

Ashkenazis being distinct from and having been in conflict with other European populations doesn't change the historical and genetic fact that they're a European population. Ashkenazis are genetically 50% European and their non-European ancestors first arrived in Europe 1000-2000 years ago. It's hard to see how they're not European unless you subscribe to some convoluted racist theory of who is or isn't a "real" European.

If you go back far enough all Europeans migrated from Asia or Africa, doesn't mean the Swiss are "really" Asian or African instead of European. You're just picking an arbitrary point in time and going "from this point on, all future arrivals to Europe are foreigners and not real Europeans." It's completely illogical.

Europeans to varying degrees have Neolithic and in some cases Bronze Age ancestry from the Middle East, but lack a sustained conscious cultural connection to that identity. Jews in Europe remained distinct through semi-isolation and endogamy because of the cultural inheritance from the Levant. The arbitrary point isn’t so arbitrary in that it’s the period when Jewish identity coalesced, but I don’t personally care whether or not someone refers to Ashkenazi Jews as European. I would only push back against factually incorrect statements about our historical connection to the Levant.

What matters as an explanation for how events turned out, is that in the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, most Europeans (or at least enough) considered Ashkenazi Jews to be foreign, and while opinions of Ashkenazi Jews themselves may have varied to some degree, many or most identified more with their Levantine-origin ancestry/culture than with the dominant ethnicity of whatever country they lived in. There were assimilationist Jewish movements, such as the Reform movement that sought to recast Judaism as strictly a religion rather than a diaspora ethnoreligious identity, but they were ultimately disabused of the notion that they would ever be accepted as such by the events of the mid-20th century. Jews only seemed to be fully accepted in Europe once there were too few to matter anymore, and by that time Israel had already been founded.

The pre-state Zionist movement did embrace many European aspects of their culture, which heavily influenced Israel’s institutions, but most wouldn’t have accepted founding a state just anywhere.

In any case, Ashkenazi identity as separate from Jewish identity is largely irrelevant to the conflict today, except in ways that are generally the inverse of the way Israel’s worst critics tend to mischaracterize it. Specifically, I’m referring to the racialist ideas that ignorant Westerners try to project on it. In brief, the notion of the white European colonizer vs the oppressed indigenous population is belied by the fact the non-Ashkenazi Jews are the voter based of the Israeli right, while male working-class non-Ashkenazi Jews are the base of the far right. The most left-wing Israelis, the type that get excited (or at least used to) about coexistence programs, are the most culturally European Ashkenazi Jews.

I would also add that most Israelis don’t actually understand Western ideas about race. A good example is this video, the only one that shows an understanding of what being white means in the way that an American would understand it is a guy who is obviously from the US or Canada: