The Jews of the Pale certainly had freakishly high birth rates, and very few Zionists factored in the demographic toll of a Holocaust-like event (which simultaneously added to and subtracted from their case after occurring). But what about the other demographic realities? I was reading the papers of Israel Zangwill earlier and he believed a territorial solution would be dominated by the "white Jews" with only a "colored fringe." Birth rate differentials apply likewise to Jewish subgroups — Mizrahi, Haredi, etc. — that I don't believe early Zionists ever figured would come to potentially dominate the society. I don't mean to disparage either group, but I also don't quite buy the claims some make of hyper-productive Haredim by 2030. For Israel, the future seems less first-world, more right-wing and belligerent, and extremely crowded overall, not to even mention the Arab Question.
Both of these require a full treatment, which I hope to do in due course IYH. However, briefly, on the subject of MENA Jews in Israel, the sorry tale is a result of the dynamic outlined in this post because (a) it was the conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine in the context of Arab nationalism that made the situation for MENA Jews in their countries untenable and (b) after 1948, Israel put a lot of effort into encourage MENA Jews immigration in a desperate attempt to solve the demographic problem. I haven't looked into it too much, but my general read is that they knew the problems, but they felt they had no choice. What I am not sure about is how much the general triumph of Boasian anthropology in the post war era (and thus the view that the MENA Jew problem was solvable over 2-3 generations) contributed to the decision.
Great post on Zangwill btw. I really enjoy your Substack in general.
Why exactly did the MENA Jew problem need to be solved? AFAIK, MENA Jews, in spite of many of them being an underclass, are not causing huge trouble in Israel. Their biggest problem is voting for the right. They're not a chronic high-crime or high-terrorism group, and at least they culturally and socially integrate and assimilate pretty well, similar to Latin Americans here in the US, in spite of them on average being a burden on the social safety net.
I do think that for Israel/Zionism specifically, the best possible outcome would have been no 1940 Fall of France and thus either no or at least a greatly reduced Holocaust. Still enough to shock the Jews with their experience with Nazi Germany, but with many more eager, living Jews being willing to move to Palestine/Israel afterwards.
I think the comparison with American Latinos is roughly correct. You get the same problems: litter, loud music, parking in bus stops - general low-level antisocial behaviour that makes life pointlessly stressful and crummy. The difference is (a) Israel is too small and cramped to get away from them and (b) they don't make a good servant class. Because they are Jews, they think they should have the same status as Ashkenazim and are chronically resentful and lazy. Whenever I have to deal with workmen, taxi drivers etc., I always breathe a sigh of relief if it's an Arab.
The low-level anti-social behavior can be addressed with public information/awareness campaigns, no? Similar to how the US successfully got Latinos to use fireworks instead of firing guns into the air in celebration, according to @Steve Sailer. Something similar could potentially work for things like littering, if there was actually the political will to try it.
I wonder if Mizrahim consider themselves to be more authentic Jews relative to the more assimilated and secular non-religious segment of the Ashkenazi Jewish Israeli population. But in any case, I don’t mind their arrogance just so long as they will refrain from touching the Grandchild Clause of Israel’s Law of Return. That’s an absolute red line for me!
Begin never tried to repeal the Grandchild Clause. Neither did Shamir, or Sharon, or Olmert. Livni did, though, and for that reason alone, she deserved to never become Israel’s Prime Minister.
That's very kind (or maybe suggestible) of you. These posts are definitely on the list. I keep pushing them backwards because I'm worried a big war will break out and something will happen that will make them moot, but in due course they will come. In the meantime, I hope you enjoy the rest of the content.
The humane solution? If war with Hezbollah breaks out, create a humanitarian corridor and offer relocation to Gazans if they go to Hezbollah-controlled territory.
"In 1900, the population of Palestine, excluding Jews, was around 550,000. The global Jewish population was probably around 8,000,000. This means that if even just 1/5 of the world’s Jews had moved to create a new Jewish state in the entire land of Israel, they would have had a 75% - 25% majority. We know that such a demographic majority would have been sufficient to create a tolerably civil peace, because these are the numbers in the state of Israel today, and things there are basically OK. Indeed, it stands to reason that things would actually be a lot better than they are right now because Jewish-Arab relations are shaped by the framework of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which Israeli Arabs are the cousins - often literally - of people blowing up Israeli buses and being manhandled at checkpoints. In the absence of this constant source of tension, it’s not out of the question that a large proportion of Arab citizens of Israel would have fully assimilated to some kind of quasi-Jewish Israeli identity, as many early Zionists intended.
The problem is that the Arab population of Eretz Yisrael didn’t stay at half a million, it grew, and grew, and grew some more. It grew so fast that, in the vast majority of years, it outpaced Jewish population growth through immigration and births combined. The Zionists had to abandon their plan to peacefully overwhelm the natives through numbers, and instead had to compete for a piece of land that wasn’t big enough for both peoples, and, after more than a century of demographic growth, isn’t really big enough even for one of them."
The world Jewish population was still rapidly growing in 1900. Without the Holocaust, it would have apparently been 26-32 million right now instead of only 16 million. And this doesn't include halakhically non-Jewish family members and close relatives of halakhic Jews.
There are 14 million Palestinians worldwide, so if half the hypothetical Jewish population of a Holocaust-free world lived in EY, then it would be a bare majority. Thus war and expulsion was inevitably either way. However, I have some further thoughts about the Holocaust and Zionism that I hope to publish soon.
Well, the best move for Palestine would have been a partition and having the Palestinians accept this partition, but admittedly this would have probably been very unlikely even in a Holocaust-free world. So, war and expulsions were unfortunately inevitable.
Another alternative in a Holocaust-free scenario is to create a Jewish state elsewhere. Maybe had the Germans won WWI, a Jewish state somewhere in Eastern Europe would have been possible? There was an idea flirted, but it wasn’t quite Zionism:
Not really. The population of Syria is 22.1 million, only half a million lower than before the civil war.
In general, expulsion is not a very effective policy. The expulsion of Arabs in 1947-48 led immediately to the formation of fedayeen groups conducting border raids on Israel. Despite their best attempts to deter this up to including massacres, the Zionists were unable to do so and eventually had to occupy the areas from which the raids were being launched. But then the Palestinian paramilitaries relocated, eventually to Lebanon. Again, the Zionists were unable to deter their attacks and eventually had to occupy southern Lebanon, which led to the creation of Hizb'Allah and fast forward to today, 60,000 people can't live in their homes and there is no way of solving it without thousands of casualties.
So, all in all, while it was clearly the case that large numbers of Arabs had to be expelled in 1947-48, it seems probable that Israel would have had fewer problems if it had expelled less, rather than more, and further expulsions are just likely to intensify the problems we already have.
You can buy/rent a used CruiseShip and fit approx 100,000 people on board. Short trip up to Latakia. get 5 ships. its done in a week. Mistake was they weren't expelled far enough. Also dont send to a country like Egypt that has some stability. what's to lose with Syria? If trump wins this could be more feasible than it has ever been. If the Israelis have the guts to go for it. But discussion need to start now.
The Jews of the Pale certainly had freakishly high birth rates, and very few Zionists factored in the demographic toll of a Holocaust-like event (which simultaneously added to and subtracted from their case after occurring). But what about the other demographic realities? I was reading the papers of Israel Zangwill earlier and he believed a territorial solution would be dominated by the "white Jews" with only a "colored fringe." Birth rate differentials apply likewise to Jewish subgroups — Mizrahi, Haredi, etc. — that I don't believe early Zionists ever figured would come to potentially dominate the society. I don't mean to disparage either group, but I also don't quite buy the claims some make of hyper-productive Haredim by 2030. For Israel, the future seems less first-world, more right-wing and belligerent, and extremely crowded overall, not to even mention the Arab Question.
Both of these require a full treatment, which I hope to do in due course IYH. However, briefly, on the subject of MENA Jews in Israel, the sorry tale is a result of the dynamic outlined in this post because (a) it was the conflict between Jews and Arabs in Palestine in the context of Arab nationalism that made the situation for MENA Jews in their countries untenable and (b) after 1948, Israel put a lot of effort into encourage MENA Jews immigration in a desperate attempt to solve the demographic problem. I haven't looked into it too much, but my general read is that they knew the problems, but they felt they had no choice. What I am not sure about is how much the general triumph of Boasian anthropology in the post war era (and thus the view that the MENA Jew problem was solvable over 2-3 generations) contributed to the decision.
Great post on Zangwill btw. I really enjoy your Substack in general.
Why exactly did the MENA Jew problem need to be solved? AFAIK, MENA Jews, in spite of many of them being an underclass, are not causing huge trouble in Israel. Their biggest problem is voting for the right. They're not a chronic high-crime or high-terrorism group, and at least they culturally and socially integrate and assimilate pretty well, similar to Latin Americans here in the US, in spite of them on average being a burden on the social safety net.
I do think that for Israel/Zionism specifically, the best possible outcome would have been no 1940 Fall of France and thus either no or at least a greatly reduced Holocaust. Still enough to shock the Jews with their experience with Nazi Germany, but with many more eager, living Jews being willing to move to Palestine/Israel afterwards.
"Their biggest problem is voting for the right."
Well, that's a pretty big problem.
I think the comparison with American Latinos is roughly correct. You get the same problems: litter, loud music, parking in bus stops - general low-level antisocial behaviour that makes life pointlessly stressful and crummy. The difference is (a) Israel is too small and cramped to get away from them and (b) they don't make a good servant class. Because they are Jews, they think they should have the same status as Ashkenazim and are chronically resentful and lazy. Whenever I have to deal with workmen, taxi drivers etc., I always breathe a sigh of relief if it's an Arab.
The low-level anti-social behavior can be addressed with public information/awareness campaigns, no? Similar to how the US successfully got Latinos to use fireworks instead of firing guns into the air in celebration, according to @Steve Sailer. Something similar could potentially work for things like littering, if there was actually the political will to try it.
I wonder if Mizrahim consider themselves to be more authentic Jews relative to the more assimilated and secular non-religious segment of the Ashkenazi Jewish Israeli population. But in any case, I don’t mind their arrogance just so long as they will refrain from touching the Grandchild Clause of Israel’s Law of Return. That’s an absolute red line for me!
It could, but Begin figured out he could win elections by pandering to them and indulging their worst features, and here we are.
Begin never tried to repeal the Grandchild Clause. Neither did Shamir, or Sharon, or Olmert. Livni did, though, and for that reason alone, she deserved to never become Israel’s Prime Minister.
I subscribed as requested - waiting eagerly for the humane non-genocidal solution!
That's very kind (or maybe suggestible) of you. These posts are definitely on the list. I keep pushing them backwards because I'm worried a big war will break out and something will happen that will make them moot, but in due course they will come. In the meantime, I hope you enjoy the rest of the content.
The humane solution? If war with Hezbollah breaks out, create a humanitarian corridor and offer relocation to Gazans if they go to Hezbollah-controlled territory.
Thank you. A good read.
"In 1900, the population of Palestine, excluding Jews, was around 550,000. The global Jewish population was probably around 8,000,000. This means that if even just 1/5 of the world’s Jews had moved to create a new Jewish state in the entire land of Israel, they would have had a 75% - 25% majority. We know that such a demographic majority would have been sufficient to create a tolerably civil peace, because these are the numbers in the state of Israel today, and things there are basically OK. Indeed, it stands to reason that things would actually be a lot better than they are right now because Jewish-Arab relations are shaped by the framework of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which Israeli Arabs are the cousins - often literally - of people blowing up Israeli buses and being manhandled at checkpoints. In the absence of this constant source of tension, it’s not out of the question that a large proportion of Arab citizens of Israel would have fully assimilated to some kind of quasi-Jewish Israeli identity, as many early Zionists intended.
The problem is that the Arab population of Eretz Yisrael didn’t stay at half a million, it grew, and grew, and grew some more. It grew so fast that, in the vast majority of years, it outpaced Jewish population growth through immigration and births combined. The Zionists had to abandon their plan to peacefully overwhelm the natives through numbers, and instead had to compete for a piece of land that wasn’t big enough for both peoples, and, after more than a century of demographic growth, isn’t really big enough even for one of them."
The world Jewish population was still rapidly growing in 1900. Without the Holocaust, it would have apparently been 26-32 million right now instead of only 16 million. And this doesn't include halakhically non-Jewish family members and close relatives of halakhic Jews.
There are 14 million Palestinians worldwide, so if half the hypothetical Jewish population of a Holocaust-free world lived in EY, then it would be a bare majority. Thus war and expulsion was inevitably either way. However, I have some further thoughts about the Holocaust and Zionism that I hope to publish soon.
Well, the best move for Palestine would have been a partition and having the Palestinians accept this partition, but admittedly this would have probably been very unlikely even in a Holocaust-free world. So, war and expulsions were unfortunately inevitable.
Another alternative in a Holocaust-free scenario is to create a Jewish state elsewhere. Maybe had the Germans won WWI, a Jewish state somewhere in Eastern Europe would have been possible? There was an idea flirted, but it wasn’t quite Zionism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_East_European_States
Apparently Jews were 15% here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grodno_Governorate
Maybe it could have worked as a hypothetical Jewish state in a German WWI victory scenario with enough Jewish migration into there?
I'll also be writing about Territorialism, bli neder.
Why is expulsion not being explored more. Lots of empty houses in Syria
Not really. The population of Syria is 22.1 million, only half a million lower than before the civil war.
In general, expulsion is not a very effective policy. The expulsion of Arabs in 1947-48 led immediately to the formation of fedayeen groups conducting border raids on Israel. Despite their best attempts to deter this up to including massacres, the Zionists were unable to do so and eventually had to occupy the areas from which the raids were being launched. But then the Palestinian paramilitaries relocated, eventually to Lebanon. Again, the Zionists were unable to deter their attacks and eventually had to occupy southern Lebanon, which led to the creation of Hizb'Allah and fast forward to today, 60,000 people can't live in their homes and there is no way of solving it without thousands of casualties.
So, all in all, while it was clearly the case that large numbers of Arabs had to be expelled in 1947-48, it seems probable that Israel would have had fewer problems if it had expelled less, rather than more, and further expulsions are just likely to intensify the problems we already have.
You can buy/rent a used CruiseShip and fit approx 100,000 people on board. Short trip up to Latakia. get 5 ships. its done in a week. Mistake was they weren't expelled far enough. Also dont send to a country like Egypt that has some stability. what's to lose with Syria? If trump wins this could be more feasible than it has ever been. If the Israelis have the guts to go for it. But discussion need to start now.