This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I understand there's some debate (and probably honest overlap) on whether post-Zionism is anti-Zionistic or not, or whether only parts of post-Zionist thinking are anti-Zionist, but the section in the article basically says that post-Zionism 'is' anti-Zionism and thus strikes me as blatantly POV, especially considering that the rest of the article maintains that there is a debate on the issue. It's also telling that the post-Zionism == anti-Zionism statement is the only sourced statement in the article, and it's sourced to an op-ed piece in Haaretz. Not necessarily the most neutral source around. -- The Centipede ( talk) 16:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, All of the links that are posted are critiques of new historians. I have put up links that explain post-zionism, not just from the academia stand-point but from those who suffer under zionism (including Jews of Mizrahi and Sephardic descent) and they are continously removed. I am in support of freedom of speech and am agree that critiques should be posted but what do I do when some right winger with too much time on his/her hands continues to remove links that explain post-zionism? Shame. Discussion is a two way street.
Why was the section mentioning criticism of the New Historians removed? Has it been moved somewhere?
Jayjg
(talk) 22:38, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It's been replaced with a link within the article to New Historians where the exact same point is made as the one removed. AndyL 23:06, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder why anti-Zionists Jews are not mentioned in the text. They do exist, now, in and outside Israel. They are divided into 2 groups, the Ashcenazi and the Arab-Jews. Ya, same old well known story - if you are a Jew, you can neither oppose Zionism, nor be an Arab at the same time. Thanks a lot Wikipedia!
Hi, does anyone have any citations for the list of post-Zionists given at the bottom of the page? Ilan Pappe, for example: is he really post-Zionist as opposed to anti-Zionist?...
An article about post-Zionism has to reference Laurence Silberstein who wrote, I believe, the book that coined the term or at least created the movement. http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~mskimmer/zion.htm "The Post-Zionism Debates" 1999. Benny Morris is listed as a "Post Zionist" but Morris and many of the others so listed deny that they are post-anything. This is also true of Ilan Pappe and just about all the other so called post Zionists. See my comments on Silberstein's article & an article in Haaretz linked from those comments - http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000247.htm 89.0.186.185- aka Mewnews, not logged in 01:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It is far from being completed - it still needs a lot of grammar corrections and more editing. you are all more than welcome to hjoin and help improve it. Acidburn24m ( talk) 06:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The reference cited by Shevashalosh is an article by an Israeli scholar named Alon Dahan. The article does not say that the term Post-Zionism is derived from Auto-Antisemitism, and even if he did, it would only be his POV. While it is true that right-wing Israelis often accuse those they call Post-Zionists of self-hatred, it would be a violation of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH to suggest those terms are objectively similar. Perhaps Dahan's arguments and similar could be added to the "Post-Zionism as Anti-Zionism" section, which could then be renamed "criticism". Any thoughts? -- Nudve ( talk) 15:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
"בשנת תשנ"ח פרסם שלמה אהרונסון מאמר בשם 'ציונות ופוסט ציונות: ההקשר ההיסטורי אידיאולוגי' בספר 'בין חזון לרוויזיה'. במאמרו פורס אהרונסון את התשתית הפילוסופית האנטישמית המשותפת לכל אותם חוקרים אוטו אנטישמים הפועלים בישראל כיום והמכונים 'היסטוריונים חדשים'. " -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
ref - "Holocaust deial in Israel": [1] -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Note to others then Nudve: This ref was brought by Nudve, after a complaint on my ref. -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I didn't claim "all Jews" think that, to the contrary, I claim is part of the "Israeli political dialogue", and this is why it is relevant in this article, since the right wing uses this to "curse" the liberals. This is why it is attached to the sentence of the fact that the right wing uses it:
1) Coined by the Israeli "right wing" and usage in link to "Auto Anti-Semitism and "self hating Jew" [2] (actually, despite this ref, the article you (Nudve) brought above "coined" the phrase "post Zionism", a new phrase was born into this world, and only then the Israeli "right wing" have adopted this phrase as a "political curse" for "Liberals")
2) Usage in politics as a "political curse" for "Liberals":
Gideon Sa'ar (from rught-wing Likud) to Yuli Tamir (Labour):
Headline of the news-article: " Saar: Tamir is a post Zionist education Minister " [3]
Yossi Beilin (Liberal politician) talking in article talking how the "right wing" classifies the left as "Post Zionists" [4].
Aharon Barak (Judge), who is Known for his liberal Court verdicts - asks, in responding to public opinion: "me ? a post-zionist ? " [5]
3) General perception of the right on post Zionism and their thought of the usage of it in Israeli politics:
Bar Ilan University (A right wing university): "Top Subjects on Israeli Politics" [6]
4) Link to new Historians:
Your (Nudve) ref [7]
haaretz on Tom Segev (hosting in his colum), Yoav Gelber - against post-modernists-post Zionists and Ilan Pappé etc, [8]
Is there any more need of citation!? (If the answer is yes, then I will)
Post Zionism can mean "Anti Zionism", but not necessarily, and here is the thing:
Post Zionism is a range of opinions:
Begging from the range of Zionists:
1) (Some of the) Zionist Left – claiming that Zionism was founded for the purpose of achieving the Jewish People's national goals – a Jewish State. Since that goal was achieved, and we do have already have our own national aspiration achieved, we need now to concentrate on other goals – like putting our efforts on achieving more peace deals with the Arabs, hence, territorial concession and compromise, those guys are Zionists, but do not believe in
Greater Israel (and this is one of the reasons they are accused of being "post Zionists", but not the only reason)
They criticize their own country – Israel, and the right wing for concentrating on "Greater Israel", rather then making peace with arabs– this is why they call themselves – " The Peace Camp" (they specificcly criticize the governments of Israel, right or left, for surrendoring to settlers based on political pressure).
End of range - anti Zionists:
2) Far left (or "new left", and various other names alike, similar to the English term "loony left") – those guys are anti Zionists. They include the "New Historians", Like Ilan pepe etc, who don't see legitimacy in Zionism, but also include all kinds of pacifists etc.
Thank you. -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 11:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't believe the use of "left-wing" and "right-wing" aids neutrality or is helpful generally. The terms are not well-defined nor will they be clear to the person without detailed knowledge of Israeli politics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.99.88.222 ( talk) 03:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately my Hebrew language skills are very bad, but it looks to me like the Dahan article is an opinion piece, not a news article. If so, it may be an example of a right-wing Israeli calling post-Zionists self-hating Jews, but it is not a reliable source for the general statement that "Right-wing Israelis have accused the post-Zionists of being self-hating Jews."
A reliable source for a statement like that would be a secondary source, one that describes the phenomenon of right-wing Israelis calling post-Zionists self-hating Jews.
Of course I may be mis-reading the Dahan article and maybe it is a secondary source (a news article as opposed to an opinion column). — Malik Shabazz ( talk · contribs) 03:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 03:44, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
The vast majority of the content in this article is entirely unsourced and comes across as WP:OR, especially the bulleted list of questions Post-Zionists ask. JohnR1Roberts ( talk) 22:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I understand there's some debate (and probably honest overlap) on whether post-Zionism is anti-Zionistic or not, or whether only parts of post-Zionist thinking are anti-Zionist, but the section in the article basically says that post-Zionism 'is' anti-Zionism and thus strikes me as blatantly POV, especially considering that the rest of the article maintains that there is a debate on the issue. It's also telling that the post-Zionism == anti-Zionism statement is the only sourced statement in the article, and it's sourced to an op-ed piece in Haaretz. Not necessarily the most neutral source around. -- The Centipede ( talk) 16:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, All of the links that are posted are critiques of new historians. I have put up links that explain post-zionism, not just from the academia stand-point but from those who suffer under zionism (including Jews of Mizrahi and Sephardic descent) and they are continously removed. I am in support of freedom of speech and am agree that critiques should be posted but what do I do when some right winger with too much time on his/her hands continues to remove links that explain post-zionism? Shame. Discussion is a two way street.
Why was the section mentioning criticism of the New Historians removed? Has it been moved somewhere?
Jayjg
(talk) 22:38, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It's been replaced with a link within the article to New Historians where the exact same point is made as the one removed. AndyL 23:06, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder why anti-Zionists Jews are not mentioned in the text. They do exist, now, in and outside Israel. They are divided into 2 groups, the Ashcenazi and the Arab-Jews. Ya, same old well known story - if you are a Jew, you can neither oppose Zionism, nor be an Arab at the same time. Thanks a lot Wikipedia!
Hi, does anyone have any citations for the list of post-Zionists given at the bottom of the page? Ilan Pappe, for example: is he really post-Zionist as opposed to anti-Zionist?...
An article about post-Zionism has to reference Laurence Silberstein who wrote, I believe, the book that coined the term or at least created the movement. http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~mskimmer/zion.htm "The Post-Zionism Debates" 1999. Benny Morris is listed as a "Post Zionist" but Morris and many of the others so listed deny that they are post-anything. This is also true of Ilan Pappe and just about all the other so called post Zionists. See my comments on Silberstein's article & an article in Haaretz linked from those comments - http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000247.htm 89.0.186.185- aka Mewnews, not logged in 01:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It is far from being completed - it still needs a lot of grammar corrections and more editing. you are all more than welcome to hjoin and help improve it. Acidburn24m ( talk) 06:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The reference cited by Shevashalosh is an article by an Israeli scholar named Alon Dahan. The article does not say that the term Post-Zionism is derived from Auto-Antisemitism, and even if he did, it would only be his POV. While it is true that right-wing Israelis often accuse those they call Post-Zionists of self-hatred, it would be a violation of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH to suggest those terms are objectively similar. Perhaps Dahan's arguments and similar could be added to the "Post-Zionism as Anti-Zionism" section, which could then be renamed "criticism". Any thoughts? -- Nudve ( talk) 15:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
"בשנת תשנ"ח פרסם שלמה אהרונסון מאמר בשם 'ציונות ופוסט ציונות: ההקשר ההיסטורי אידיאולוגי' בספר 'בין חזון לרוויזיה'. במאמרו פורס אהרונסון את התשתית הפילוסופית האנטישמית המשותפת לכל אותם חוקרים אוטו אנטישמים הפועלים בישראל כיום והמכונים 'היסטוריונים חדשים'. " -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
ref - "Holocaust deial in Israel": [1] -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Note to others then Nudve: This ref was brought by Nudve, after a complaint on my ref. -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 16:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I didn't claim "all Jews" think that, to the contrary, I claim is part of the "Israeli political dialogue", and this is why it is relevant in this article, since the right wing uses this to "curse" the liberals. This is why it is attached to the sentence of the fact that the right wing uses it:
1) Coined by the Israeli "right wing" and usage in link to "Auto Anti-Semitism and "self hating Jew" [2] (actually, despite this ref, the article you (Nudve) brought above "coined" the phrase "post Zionism", a new phrase was born into this world, and only then the Israeli "right wing" have adopted this phrase as a "political curse" for "Liberals")
2) Usage in politics as a "political curse" for "Liberals":
Gideon Sa'ar (from rught-wing Likud) to Yuli Tamir (Labour):
Headline of the news-article: " Saar: Tamir is a post Zionist education Minister " [3]
Yossi Beilin (Liberal politician) talking in article talking how the "right wing" classifies the left as "Post Zionists" [4].
Aharon Barak (Judge), who is Known for his liberal Court verdicts - asks, in responding to public opinion: "me ? a post-zionist ? " [5]
3) General perception of the right on post Zionism and their thought of the usage of it in Israeli politics:
Bar Ilan University (A right wing university): "Top Subjects on Israeli Politics" [6]
4) Link to new Historians:
Your (Nudve) ref [7]
haaretz on Tom Segev (hosting in his colum), Yoav Gelber - against post-modernists-post Zionists and Ilan Pappé etc, [8]
Is there any more need of citation!? (If the answer is yes, then I will)
Post Zionism can mean "Anti Zionism", but not necessarily, and here is the thing:
Post Zionism is a range of opinions:
Begging from the range of Zionists:
1) (Some of the) Zionist Left – claiming that Zionism was founded for the purpose of achieving the Jewish People's national goals – a Jewish State. Since that goal was achieved, and we do have already have our own national aspiration achieved, we need now to concentrate on other goals – like putting our efforts on achieving more peace deals with the Arabs, hence, territorial concession and compromise, those guys are Zionists, but do not believe in
Greater Israel (and this is one of the reasons they are accused of being "post Zionists", but not the only reason)
They criticize their own country – Israel, and the right wing for concentrating on "Greater Israel", rather then making peace with arabs– this is why they call themselves – " The Peace Camp" (they specificcly criticize the governments of Israel, right or left, for surrendoring to settlers based on political pressure).
End of range - anti Zionists:
2) Far left (or "new left", and various other names alike, similar to the English term "loony left") – those guys are anti Zionists. They include the "New Historians", Like Ilan pepe etc, who don't see legitimacy in Zionism, but also include all kinds of pacifists etc.
Thank you. -- Shevashalosh ( talk) 11:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't believe the use of "left-wing" and "right-wing" aids neutrality or is helpful generally. The terms are not well-defined nor will they be clear to the person without detailed knowledge of Israeli politics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.99.88.222 ( talk) 03:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately my Hebrew language skills are very bad, but it looks to me like the Dahan article is an opinion piece, not a news article. If so, it may be an example of a right-wing Israeli calling post-Zionists self-hating Jews, but it is not a reliable source for the general statement that "Right-wing Israelis have accused the post-Zionists of being self-hating Jews."
A reliable source for a statement like that would be a secondary source, one that describes the phenomenon of right-wing Israelis calling post-Zionists self-hating Jews.
Of course I may be mis-reading the Dahan article and maybe it is a secondary source (a news article as opposed to an opinion column). — Malik Shabazz ( talk · contribs) 03:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 03:44, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
The vast majority of the content in this article is entirely unsourced and comes across as WP:OR, especially the bulleted list of questions Post-Zionists ask. JohnR1Roberts ( talk) 22:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)