The Invention of the Jewish People

I have been so impressed by Shlomo Sand's book, The Invention of the Jewish People, that here I am reproducing the review of it I wrote for Goodreads.com

* * * * *

I have written reviews of many books here. If there is one above all the rest that I would like others to read it would be this one.

Regardless of the country you call home, it rests on a foundation of myths, stories of the distant past that unite the citizenry. Israel is no exception, yet the story of the historical Jews is one that more people in the United States are familiar with that that of any other people.

Shlomo Sand begins his book discussing definitions - what are a people? What is a nation? With his terms defined, he looks at the story of the Jews and how it relates to what has been discovered (or not) by archeology, philology (language study) and archival research.

He takes us from the founding myth of the Jews as a tribe descended from Abraham, in captivity in Egypt, escaping in the Exodus, wandering in the desert for 40 years, defeating the Canaanites, living under kings David and Solomon, exiled to Babylon, returning to Judea, expelled by the Romans and continuing on to the present in Israel.

There's only one problem. Except for the Babylonian exile, none of this account of the Jews in ancient times holds up. There is no evidence for any of it and plenty of facts that deny it. The central fact is that there was never any expulsion of the Jews by the Romans after the Jewish revolt was suppressed in 70 CE.

But the facts are no less interesting than the myth. Did you know there was a Jewish Khazar empire between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea? Did you know there was a long period (400 years) of enthusiastic conversion to Judaism prior to the coming of Christianity? Did you know there was a Jewish warrior queen in north Africa and a Jewish kingdom in what is now Yemen?

Sand effectively makes the case that the vast majority of today's Jews have no connection by birth to the Jews of ancient Palestine. The Palestinians of today are more likely related to the Jews of ancient times. Today's Jews are descendants of converts to Judaism. It is impossible to define the Jews by genetics, only by religion.

So where did the mythology come from? It is based on the Biblical account and even that was never considered to be based on hard facts until the coming of Zionism put it to use to create the body of people who would become the people of modern Israel - it was a script, made concrete and embellished by those with an agenda for creating a new country.

And the agenda continues to be followed by historians in the modern state of Israel. One of the most remarkable things mentioned by Sand is the complete lack of scholarly research into the origins of modern Jewry by anyone in Israel. Why? Because it would contradict the story of the nation, the story that is in Israeli textbooks used in Israeli schools to teach history.

The overwhelming evidence for the origin of the Yiddish-speaking millions of eastern Europe (destroyed or driven out by the end of WW2) is the Khazar empire and not Germany. The Sephardim of Spain and north Africa came not from ancient Palestine but from converts to Judaism. There is no Jewish gene, just as there is no Anglican or Methodist or Catholic gene.

The book concludes by an examination of the dilemma of modern Israel - a country that denies there is such a thing as an Israeli or an Israeli culture. Citizens of Israel are defined as Jews quite intentionally to connect them to the Jews of the world and to disconnect them from the Palistino-Israelis, the Arab citizens of Israel who make up a fifth of the population of the country, but are denied acknowledgment as full citizens.

Israelis allow orthodox religious Jews to determine who is a Jew for the purpose of citizenship precisely to maintain the connection to world Jewry as a pseudo-biological link. This mythological link allows Israel to take in foreigners (in all but religion) as rightful heirs to the land while denying legitimacy to those who have actually been living on the land, the Palestinian. It's an inherently unstable situation that cannot continue indefinitely. The book is a warning that things must change in the direction of a true democracy and away from an "ethnocracy".

The Invention of the Jewish People is a riveting read during which Sand systematically and very clearly demolishes myth under the bright light of solid research. In the process he introduces the people who built the myth to epic proportions and relates how they did so. Shlomo Sand is a credit to his profession. Bravo!

P.S. It appears that Bible study in Israeli schools is not thorough enough. In this article, the Israeli Education Minister says "No doubt there was a need for change in the Bible study program, which veered away from the actual folktales". In America we keep religious study completely out of our public schools and we have also escaped the cowboys and Indians historical mythology that mis-educated young Americans for so long. In Israel, it seems there is a need for more emphasis on the mythology that Professor Sand debunks in his book, so that the good guys can continue to be distinguished from the bad guys.

two paragraphs of great insight

Shlomo Sand, a professor of history at the University of Tel Aviv has produced what I consider a masterpiece of rationality, The Invention of the Jewish People.

Two paragraphs from near the end of the book cry out for a large audience because they summarize the situation of Israel so concisely and pertain so directly to what this blog examines. See if you don't agree...(boldface mine)

No Jew who lives today in a liberal Western democracy would tolerate the discrimination and exclusion experienced by the Palestino-Israelis (Arab citizens of Israel), who live in a state that proclaims it is not theirs. But Zionist supporters among the Jews around the world, like most Israelis, are quite unconcerned, or do not wish to know that the "Jewish state", because of its undemocratic laws, could never have been part of the European Union or one of America's fifty states. This flawed reality does not stop them from expressing solidarity with Israel, and even regarding it as their reserve home. Not that this solidarity impels them to abandon their national homelands and immigrate to Israel. And why should they, seeing that they are not subjected to daily discrimination and alienation of the kind that Palestino-Israelis experience daily in their native country?

In recent years the Jewish state has become less interested in large-scale immigration. The old nationalist discourse that revolved around the idea of aliyah (Jews moving to Israel) has lost much of its appeal. To understand current Israeli politics, replace the word "aliyah" with "diaspora" (the spread of Jews throughout the world). Today, Israel's strength no longer depends on demographic increase, but rather on retaining the loyalty of overseas Jewish organizations and communities. It would be a serious setback for Israel if all the pro-Zionist lobbies were to immigrate en masse to the Holy Land. It is much more useful for them to remain close to the centers of power and communication in the Western world - and indeed they prefer to remain in the rich, liberal, comfortable "diaspora".

There it is in a nutshell - an explanation for the dedication and power of the Israel lobby in the United States. The challenge for Americans is to break this power over Congress and that's what all my blogging is about.

and what of Christians?

I was raised in a Christian family. It didn't take. I'm an atheist who sees no reason why human beings cannot have a system of morality based on the simple fact that you can feel pain, I can feel pain and we should both minimize, if not eliminate, any pain experienced by others as we would want them to do the same with us.

So, I don't look upon Christianity as superior to any other religion. In fact, I am disappointed when I see those calling themselves Christian acting in a way counter to anything I ever learned about the teachings of Jesus. To my mind, the best Christian is the one concerned with practicing his/her beliefs rather than boasting to others of his/her Christianity and pointing out the many sins of others.

The ultimate in Christian hypocrisy were the "Christian" militias in the Lebanese civil war. In America, a good example of being far from Christianity though professing it, are those elated at the thought of Judgement Day, primarily because they believe they will see those with whom they do not agree punished. A good example of this is John Hagee.

Hagee is known for his fierce defense of Israel. In the settlement of Ariel there is a John Hagee Center, built with some of the money he has raised and sent to Israel. There is little evidence that he gives a hoot about the Jews or knows much about them as this video documents. I doubt he knows a thing about the Palestinians that his money helps oppress.

On the bright side, there are some Christians who are behaving exactly as I would expect of those who practice what Jesus taught. Take a look at CPT - Christian Peacemaker Teams They have a great motto - "Getting in the way" wearing red hats as they stand their ground non-violently against force employed by the IDF against peaceful protesters. You will see two of them appear in this video at about 5:30 in, as they protest the restriction of Shuhada Street in Hebron to Jews only.

countries in the courtroom - but not U.S.

You may recall my posting on Adib Abu Ramah, another Palestinian languishes in prison, with a video showing him in non-violent action protesting the Israeli wall cutting through Bil'in (bee-il-EEN) , a town in the West Bank about 10 miles NW of Jerusalem.

Another protester from the same village, Abdallah, was an organizer of the weekly protests at Bil'in.

In prison since December of last year, on August 24, 2010 Abdallah was sentenced under military law for "incitement and organizing illegal demonstrations". His additional time in prison will be announced soon. UPDATE 10/15/2010 - Abdallah has been given another year in prison

From a report on the verdict:

incitement is defined as "The attempt, verbally or otherwise, to influence public opinion in the Area in a way that may disturb the public peace or public order" (section 7(a) of the Order Concerning Prohibition of Activities of Incitement and Hostile Propaganda (no.101), 1967), and carries a 10 years maximal sentence.

Military law defines illegal assembly in a much stricter way than Israeli law does, and in practice forbids any assembly of more than 10 people without receiving a permit from the military commander.

How could any law be more sweeping than that? Not only does the military put people under arrest, it is also the military that judges!

Yes, it's outrageous. That's why, per the report, diplomats from France, Malta, Germany, Spain and the UK, as well as a representative of the European Union were in attendance to observe the trial.

Notice a glaring absence - that of anyone from the United States Department of State? The world's superpower and defender of freedom of speech is not allowed by the Israel lobby to be there. Other countries are not so intimidated.

Here is the statement from the Spanish Parliament on the verdict -

STATEMENT FROM THE PARLIAMENTARY INTERGROUP FOR PALESTINE ABOUT ABDALLAH ABU RAHMAH'S CONVICTION (The Intergroup for Palestine is an official body of the Spanish Parliament, in which all political parties are represented. Its decisions and statements are achieved by full consensus)

On August 24, 2010, the coordinator of the Bil'in Popular Committee (West Bank), Abdallah Abu Rahmah, was convicted of incitement and of participating in and organizing demonstrations by an Israeli Military Court.

This sentence comes after an eight months trial, during which the defendant has been bereft of freedom.

He is now awaiting his sentence, which could carry several years in prison.

The Parliamentary Intergroup for Palestine considers the Bil'in peaceful struggle against the construction of the Separation Wall, which was declared illegal, as a defense of the primacy of law and international law in the face of arbitrary decisions, which ignore not only the reiterated resolutions of the United Nations’ political bodies, but also Israel's own legal organization.

The peaceful opposition to the occupation and the construction of the Wall is in and of itself a defense of the individual and collective human rights of the Palestinian People, which deserves the protection of the international community.

It is on these grounds that Catherine Ashton, the High Representative of the European Union, has issued a statement on the issue on August 24, to which the Intergroup subscribes.

Therefore, we express our deep concern that Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s potential incarceration aims at preventing him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest against the existence of the Wall in a non violent manner.

Spanish Congress of Deputies Hall, August 30, 2010.

You can get a full account of the history of and reason for the demonstrations at Bil'in.

Abdallah was released in March 2011

a mouse with a lion's power

Suppose a single mouse had the power of a lion.

Would the mouse, knowing he had such power, be content to remain living as just another mouse among his fellows?

I believe the power of the United States has been more of a liability than an asset, a view supported in the case of Vietnam by Gareth Porter's Perils of Dominance. Those who reach the top of the political ladder are proven lovers of power. It can be expected that such people will itch to use the greatest power on the planet, particularly since they are convinced it is for the good. The so-called Bush Doctrine of unilateral pre-emptive action was proof to me that the end of the USSR had unleashed a threat simply from lack of restraint. The Iraq and Afghanistan adventures have proven this out.

Now consider Israel, the mouse. It, like any other country, has power-seekers at the top. But what makes Israel unique in the world of international relations is that the power it wields is that of the United States - the lion's power is held by the mouse - while surrounding states are only other mice. How much more seductive could this be to the power hungry? To such people it is a pure win - all the power with little of the expense of wielding it.

That's why it is essential that we Americans take back our Congress from the Israel lobby.

Listen to the words of Gideon Levy, an Israeli and columnist for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, from a recent interview by Jamie Stern-Weiner...

If activists in the US succeeded in changing American foreign policy significantly, could Israel continue the occupation without US support?

No way. Israel cannot carry on anything, including its existence, without the support of the United States. Israel was never so isolated and never so dependent on the United States as now. So the key is in Washington, no doubt. The problem is that I don’t see… I see a change in Washington, but a very minor one.

Do you see much change in how the Obama administration has approached the conflict, compared to its predecessors?

I’d be more than happy to hear any sign of change. There’s been nothing. When he was elected and gave that speech in Chicago, I had tears in my eyes. I really hoped and believed that it was going to be a new atmosphere, a new world and a new Middle East. Nothing, but nothing, out of this. It’s a deep, deep disappointment.

President Obama does so little because he is afraid of the power of Congress to undercut him. Congress can undercut him only because you and I and many other Americans stand by. But what about those in Israel? Where is the opposition? Again, from the interview...

Over the past decade Israeli public opinion seems to have gone over the cliff – the last elections produced the most right-wing and possibly, as your recent columns have suggested, the most racist Knesset in Israel’s history. What is behind this trend?

There were two things happening. One was the failure of the Camp David conference in 2000, when Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak comes back and claims there is no ‘Palestinian partner’. This lie was well spread and convinced Israelis from across the political spectrum. And then came the Second Intifada – the exploding buses, the suicide bombers – and the entire so-called ‘Israeli Left’ totally crashed—which makes me think, ‘how solid was it in the first place?’ Because if it was so easy to crash it, then I’m not sure it was very solid before. But in any case, nothing was left of the Israeli Left, except for some small, devoted, courageous groups which are still very active. Unfortunately, they are not very influential.

What this means is the settlers, a group of just over 300,000 people, living in a land not their own, have the power of the U.S. at their disposal. Why do we let them have it and how crazy is it to endanger the security of the United States by allowing this to continue?

no bill of rights for Palestinians

In the Bill of Rights, a series of amendments to the United States Constitution, amendment three states -

"No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

But here we see west of Hebron, in the West Bank, Israeli soldiers make themselves at home after walking unannounced into the house of the Salayma family. This is not an isolated case, CBS News has covered a similar situation.


Is the United States opposing this action? No, it is continuing to support Israel in every way - America defending un-American acts. Hypocritical yes, but that's the definition of U.S. support for Israel and it will continue unless Americans act to change it.

the discomfort of apartheid

Israel is in a fix of its own making.

Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper, has published the results of a poll among Israeli students that indicates most of the teens polled agree that Arab Israelis do not have equal rights in Israel. Of this group, a majority agree that Arab Israelis do not deserve equal rights.

This should be expected because it comes from the design of the state, intended specifically for Jews. I'm surprised the results aren't more stark.

The admission of a limited number of Arabs as Israeli citizens came in 1952, at the same time prohibiting citizenship to any Arab who left Israel during or after 1948; a concession to make the best of a sticky situation. By legalizing citizenship for a minority of Arabs who had been living in what was to become Israel and had stayed, the law excluded the great majority who had fled, sealing the state from any further appeals for return by former Arab residents.

At the time that Theodore Herzl wrote The Jewish State (1896), and for several decades thereafter, the positive aspects of a land for Jews alone was persuasive, if only as a refuge from the European world that preyed upon them. The Holocaust and the following reluctance of other countries to admit the victims virtually dictated the creation of Israel.

These days, Germany and Poland seem benign places. The Poles have in some cases revived Jewish culture, though only a few Jews remain there. After WW2, this would never have been considered a possibility. Couldn't Jews thrive almost anywhere today in Europe, even in places they thought would be hostile for all time? But Israel exists and will continue to exist - but not easily.

I say not easily because the whole idea of exclusion, while in the very nature of historical religious practice, ill fits a people who have so consistently been among the front rank of philosophers and practitioners of individual freedom and human rights. Look at the list of Israeli human rights group at the upper right of this blog. One might say of Israel that it seemed like a good idea at the time of formation but becomes harder to defend as the years roll by and the physical state acts in defiance of so much "metaphysical" Jewish thinking that has humanity in its debt.

Israel can't look to any other country for comfort. The South African effort collapsed and the world as a whole doesn't look fondly on exclusive citizenship. Tribal wars continue, certainly, but everyone looks to their end in the future. So Israel is stuck in a bind - wanting to think of itself as an advanced, civilized place, even as it practices something archaic. Though Israel is a fortress, is there any doubt that every Israeli could live in peace and security elsewhere? The primary reason for the state has evaporated. Yes, anti-Semitism still exists, but it can never be more than a shadow of what it was. The places where it was most cruelly practiced are now ashamed of that part of their history and repudiate the occasional eruptions of extremism.

Yet, irony of ironies - the United States, a country that has always boasted it represents the most advanced form of civilization, is the unquestioning backstop for Israel. By arming Israel to the teeth and pouring in money, the U.S. allows Israel to drive on regardless and, in fact, to use military might to isolate itself ever more completely.

So when someone tells you that the U.S. is doing what is right for Israel, don't believe it. All that is accomplished is putting off the day when Israel will have to face the uncomfortable nature of its design squarely. Apartheid has no future, no matter how adamant its defense.

I think of it this way. Imagine someone has a machine gun. He sees an enemy in front of him but, thanks to a crew that endlessly feeds him ammo, he can keep up a steady fire, mowing down all comers. There's no need for him to question what he's doing because it works, he is secure and the ammo is endless.

But suppose the ammo suppliers tell him that they will have to start reducing the amount he can have until finally no more will be available. To survive, our dedicated gunner must come up with an alternative to shooting.

Israel needs to be looking for alternatives instead of stoutly digging in deeper. The Unites States, specifically the United States Congress, is acting to increase the number of extremists and extremist acts in Israel. The Israel lobby is a decidedly right-wing operation and must be opposed.