At this point, “I support a two-state solution” isn’t a policy, it’s a slogan. It signals moderation while ignoring reality: permanent settlement expansion, explicit rejection of Palestinian sovereignty, and a single regime enforcing unequal rights.
When equality and the Palestinian right of return are excluded from the outset, what’s being offered isn’t peace but the management of dispossession, with justice deferred indefinitely.
The State of Israel is a perversion of Judaism, or at least what I always believed in my Sunday School naïveté to be the religion of my ancestors. Now, our heads explode under the pressure of dissonance as we, the People of The Book, the people of social justice, perennial victims of atrocities, have made a place safe for a peaceful sabbath justice by committing institutionalized racism, theft and murder. I really appreciated this piece, not least for its description of the fact that no Israeli government has wanted or sought any real “solution” to the problems caused by the 1948 invasion of Palestine. You might imagine how this opinion has resonated with some of my relatives, whose lifetime of indoctrination into the cult of Israel-is-Judaism, or vice-versa, leaves scant room for knowledge. And in this miasma of protestations, I really don’t know what Judaism is, beyond doing the best we can for others and the planet. At that, we are failing. As to what we have taught ourselves to believe is our prime directive, in Hebrew, Tikkun Olam (repair the world), if Israel is the best a putative Jewish state can be, we are failing.
Have any Jews, whatever their political party, ever asked the rest of the world if this "repair" is wanted? It would by its nature be performed to Jewish standards and because of Jewish ideas about religious requirements. As such, it's an attempt at theocratic domination. As such, it's not at all liberal. I am not persuaded that anyone who believes in this set of ideas can fully incorporate or understand liberalism; they have a prior conflict.
The invasion of Palestine began in the 1800s and was well under way even before Herzl stepped into the role of charismatic leader. I have a couple of sources to suggest. Are you able to read Hebrew? You might be able to read 'Ahad Ha-am''s "Truth From Eretz Yisrael" in the original. Otherwise, it's translated in this academic paper
And the fan club for the terrorist Stern Gang/Lehi gives a history of their activities. Here's a page which talks about their rivalries with the other gangs and basically everyone.
As they were the last of the three main terror gangs to develop, one can sort of project backwards to sense the timeline. In fact, Vladimir Jabotinsky was illicitly training Jews living in Palestine in the use of arms, and fomenting trouble with the Arabs then trying to get the British to turn armed policing duties over to the Jews, by 1920. (the parallels to today's attempts by Chabad to get Australia to give them the right to act as police aren't accidental. They try to set up armed militias everywhere they go and have established "patrols" that seek out trouble in NYC and London).
* for all my additional information sharing and commentary, please don't think I'm unappreciative of your standing against pressure. I know it's intense.
Thanks for the comments and references. My use of the phrase “repair the world” reflects a general ethos of making the world a better place. For sure, people of a certain tribe/business/religion/gang ought to be expected to want things to be better for themselves. But taking a broader view, this has nothing to do with a “Jewish” prescription for “repair,” if such a notion exists. And I really don’t care. I just believe that humanity—and all life—will benefit by our helping one another, within the ethical principles of my life. Your reference to Jewish religious practices and “theocratic domination” is very far from the point I’d intended to make.
Great article. The two-state solution is indeed a sham.
In the words of Henry Siegman:
'The Middle East peace process may well be the most spectacular deception in modern diplomatic history. Since the failed Camp David summit of 2000, and actually well before it, Israel’s interest in a peace process...has been a fiction that has served primarily to provide cover for its systematic confiscation of Palestinian land and an occupation whose goal, according to the former IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon, is ‘to sear deep into the consciousness of Palestinians that they are a defeated people’.'
The Great Middle East Peace Process Scam - London Review of Books (2007)
Why would Israel be allowed to "undo public investment" upon its departure? To the extent the Palestinians want to keep it, it should be left intact. They've already been exploited in their blood and bones for the building of the facilities from which they're excluded, and often enough a given Palestinian's objection to the situation is that they are not allowed to benefit from the state imposed on top of them.
Was South Africa allowed to dismantle its constructions as it dismantled its apartheid? I don't even think the idea ever crossed anyone's mind, except perhaps among the most jackbooted neo-nazi types, the sort who simmer in little gangs and gripe privately.
When Britain left its colonial situations, how many times did they attempt to destroy everything they'd built?
Why does dismantling everything seem like what Israel would leap to, as the only alternative to keeping on illegally occupying? They knew the land wasn't legal to occupy when they did it.
The two state solution has not been viable since sometime in the mid 90s…and as it turns out has and is being used as a stall tactic so more and more Palestinian land can be appropriated.
Exactly right. And now genocide and an acceleration of the ethnic cleansing have been added to the mix. Many Zionists have totally abandoned that line of argument because even they recognize it is laughable, and the reasoning now becomes, that is when not unashamedly racist, “everybody else has done it so criticizing us is antisemitic”.
Hello Oslo Accords? Yasser Arafat chose to pass on a 2 state solution opting for all. Not some. That didn’t work out too well. Please don’t eschew history when it doesn’t fit your narrrative. Makes you look intellectually dishonest.
So when The british ran out of the usa in 1781, they gone Off to Jamaica.
1/3 for, 1/3 against and 1/3 watched. GB failed. The properties were taken. They lost. Israel lost. But will still occupy palestine with warped... colonial lies. The brits tried in 1812. Burned the white house but ...
An accurate discussion of the conflict between Zionism and a two-state solution. The two-state approach is nothing more than a mechanism for buying time. I suspect, but admit that it is only a suspicion and not a fact, that should there ever be a proper investigation into Israeli intelligence and security practices in the months leading up to October 7, the world will learn that the attack was anticipated, defences were intentionally reduced to ensure the attack was sufficiently horrific, and the subsequent genocide was in fact an intended outcome. The Israeli propaganda post October 7 (eg 40 beheaded babies) was then sufficiently effective to defer global condemnation in the immediate aftermath.
No sane person supports giving the Palestinians, who support terrorism, a state of their own. When they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel as a sovereign state, then negotiations can begin. Your depiction of the situation is an inversion of reality.
No sane person would have given Israel the right to exist in the middle-east region, if it would have been clear what their aims were back in 1948. It is and was always based on terror and ethnic cleansing. So shut up and don't call the resistance terrorists.
It only exists on lies and betrayal of the Zionists.
At this point, “I support a two-state solution” isn’t a policy, it’s a slogan. It signals moderation while ignoring reality: permanent settlement expansion, explicit rejection of Palestinian sovereignty, and a single regime enforcing unequal rights.
When equality and the Palestinian right of return are excluded from the outset, what’s being offered isn’t peace but the management of dispossession, with justice deferred indefinitely.
The State of Israel is a perversion of Judaism, or at least what I always believed in my Sunday School naïveté to be the religion of my ancestors. Now, our heads explode under the pressure of dissonance as we, the People of The Book, the people of social justice, perennial victims of atrocities, have made a place safe for a peaceful sabbath justice by committing institutionalized racism, theft and murder. I really appreciated this piece, not least for its description of the fact that no Israeli government has wanted or sought any real “solution” to the problems caused by the 1948 invasion of Palestine. You might imagine how this opinion has resonated with some of my relatives, whose lifetime of indoctrination into the cult of Israel-is-Judaism, or vice-versa, leaves scant room for knowledge. And in this miasma of protestations, I really don’t know what Judaism is, beyond doing the best we can for others and the planet. At that, we are failing. As to what we have taught ourselves to believe is our prime directive, in Hebrew, Tikkun Olam (repair the world), if Israel is the best a putative Jewish state can be, we are failing.
Have any Jews, whatever their political party, ever asked the rest of the world if this "repair" is wanted? It would by its nature be performed to Jewish standards and because of Jewish ideas about religious requirements. As such, it's an attempt at theocratic domination. As such, it's not at all liberal. I am not persuaded that anyone who believes in this set of ideas can fully incorporate or understand liberalism; they have a prior conflict.
The invasion of Palestine began in the 1800s and was well under way even before Herzl stepped into the role of charismatic leader. I have a couple of sources to suggest. Are you able to read Hebrew? You might be able to read 'Ahad Ha-am''s "Truth From Eretz Yisrael" in the original. Otherwise, it's translated in this academic paper
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30245555
And the fan club for the terrorist Stern Gang/Lehi gives a history of their activities. Here's a page which talks about their rivalries with the other gangs and basically everyone.
https://lehi.org.il/en/stricken-with-the-madness-of-kingship-the-freedom-fighters-of-the-homeland-in-the-shadow-of-the-extinction-of-irgun-tzvai-leumi-be-israel/
As they were the last of the three main terror gangs to develop, one can sort of project backwards to sense the timeline. In fact, Vladimir Jabotinsky was illicitly training Jews living in Palestine in the use of arms, and fomenting trouble with the Arabs then trying to get the British to turn armed policing duties over to the Jews, by 1920. (the parallels to today's attempts by Chabad to get Australia to give them the right to act as police aren't accidental. They try to set up armed militias everywhere they go and have established "patrols" that seek out trouble in NYC and London).
* for all my additional information sharing and commentary, please don't think I'm unappreciative of your standing against pressure. I know it's intense.
Thanks for the comments and references. My use of the phrase “repair the world” reflects a general ethos of making the world a better place. For sure, people of a certain tribe/business/religion/gang ought to be expected to want things to be better for themselves. But taking a broader view, this has nothing to do with a “Jewish” prescription for “repair,” if such a notion exists. And I really don’t care. I just believe that humanity—and all life—will benefit by our helping one another, within the ethical principles of my life. Your reference to Jewish religious practices and “theocratic domination” is very far from the point I’d intended to make.
Thank you for this essay. The 'two state solution' was always about kicking the can down the road while the Israeli state expanded.
Great article. The two-state solution is indeed a sham.
In the words of Henry Siegman:
'The Middle East peace process may well be the most spectacular deception in modern diplomatic history. Since the failed Camp David summit of 2000, and actually well before it, Israel’s interest in a peace process...has been a fiction that has served primarily to provide cover for its systematic confiscation of Palestinian land and an occupation whose goal, according to the former IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon, is ‘to sear deep into the consciousness of Palestinians that they are a defeated people’.'
The Great Middle East Peace Process Scam - London Review of Books (2007)
Why would Israel be allowed to "undo public investment" upon its departure? To the extent the Palestinians want to keep it, it should be left intact. They've already been exploited in their blood and bones for the building of the facilities from which they're excluded, and often enough a given Palestinian's objection to the situation is that they are not allowed to benefit from the state imposed on top of them.
Was South Africa allowed to dismantle its constructions as it dismantled its apartheid? I don't even think the idea ever crossed anyone's mind, except perhaps among the most jackbooted neo-nazi types, the sort who simmer in little gangs and gripe privately.
When Britain left its colonial situations, how many times did they attempt to destroy everything they'd built?
Why does dismantling everything seem like what Israel would leap to, as the only alternative to keeping on illegally occupying? They knew the land wasn't legal to occupy when they did it.
I mean these questions sincerely, if searchingly.
The two state solution has not been viable since sometime in the mid 90s…and as it turns out has and is being used as a stall tactic so more and more Palestinian land can be appropriated.
Exactly right. And now genocide and an acceleration of the ethnic cleansing have been added to the mix. Many Zionists have totally abandoned that line of argument because even they recognize it is laughable, and the reasoning now becomes, that is when not unashamedly racist, “everybody else has done it so criticizing us is antisemitic”.
The lies told by aparthied and delusion of a super belief.
sad losers & Disgrace for judaism.
Hello Oslo Accords? Yasser Arafat chose to pass on a 2 state solution opting for all. Not some. That didn’t work out too well. Please don’t eschew history when it doesn’t fit your narrrative. Makes you look intellectually dishonest.
So when The british ran out of the usa in 1781, they gone Off to Jamaica.
1/3 for, 1/3 against and 1/3 watched. GB failed. The properties were taken. They lost. Israel lost. But will still occupy palestine with warped... colonial lies. The brits tried in 1812. Burned the white house but ...
An accurate discussion of the conflict between Zionism and a two-state solution. The two-state approach is nothing more than a mechanism for buying time. I suspect, but admit that it is only a suspicion and not a fact, that should there ever be a proper investigation into Israeli intelligence and security practices in the months leading up to October 7, the world will learn that the attack was anticipated, defences were intentionally reduced to ensure the attack was sufficiently horrific, and the subsequent genocide was in fact an intended outcome. The Israeli propaganda post October 7 (eg 40 beheaded babies) was then sufficiently effective to defer global condemnation in the immediate aftermath.
No sane person supports giving the Palestinians, who support terrorism, a state of their own. When they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel as a sovereign state, then negotiations can begin. Your depiction of the situation is an inversion of reality.
No sane person would have given Israel the right to exist in the middle-east region, if it would have been clear what their aims were back in 1948. It is and was always based on terror and ethnic cleansing. So shut up and don't call the resistance terrorists.
It only exists on lies and betrayal of the Zionists.
What to think then of a people who support a genocide perpetrated in their name? What do they deserve?