Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel. Show all posts

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Linguistics of the Jewish diaspora

Our knowledge of Jewish life in the second century B.C.E. comes mainly from Flavius Josephus (37/38-95/100 C.E.), the great Jewish-Roman historian who wrote in Greek, the scholarly language of his time. The hellenization of the Jews had been thorough.The King of Judea and the High Priest of Yahweh had Greek names. (page 240).

During the third century B.C.E., the Tobiads were the principal advocates of hellenization among the Jews (Grayzel 1969:49). The Jewish family called the Tobiads (the sons of Tobias) traced their ancestry to Tobias the Ammonite, governor of the Persian province of Ammon (now Jordan), east of Jordan River, during the tenure of Nehemiah in Judea in the fifth century B.C.E. One of them, Joseph ben Tobias, became very prominent during the second half of that century. (page 219).

By the beginning of the third century B.C.E. the Jews were being hellenized rapidly. They no longer spoke Hebrew or Aramaic, but Greek. Their religious services were conducted in Greek. Their personal Hebrew names were hellenized: Honio became Onias, Ezra became Esdras, Yeshua became Iesous (Jesus), and Joshua became Jason. Some Jews had Greek names only, such as Antigonus, Hyrkanos, Aristobolus, or Philon (Philo).The choice of such names by Jews for their children indicated the degree of their hellenization. (page 219).

During the reign of Ptolemaios Philadelphos (Ptolemy II, 308-246 B.C.E.), the Torah and other Jewish holy scriptures were translated into Greek by a synod of scholars. (page 215).

During the years that he was the High Priest and ethnarch (175-171 B.C.E.) Jason promoted Greek sports at the expense of Temple worship. Jason did not last long in the office of High Priest. He was unseated in 171 B.C.E. by Menelaos, a member of the noble Jewish Tobiads and a more extreme Hellenizer than Jason himself.(page 224-225).

By the first century, Greek had become the language of the Jews in the”diaspora”. The Jews of the Hellenic world spoke Greek the way present-day American Jews speak English. During the Greco-Roman and the Byzantine periods, from the late fourth century B.C.E., to the early seventh century C.E. most Jews were thoroughly Hellenized.(page 454).

By the third century B.C.E the Jews of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt had become thoroughly hellenized. They worshipped Zeus, Hera, and the rest of the Greek pantheon. There were images of Greek sun god Helios, the wine god Dionysos, and the demigod Heracles on Jewish synagogue floor mosaics at Sepphori an other Gallilean cities as late as the sixth century C.E. But the Orthodox Jews violently resisted Hellenism. The conflict between Helenism and Judaism, or rather between hellenized and Orthodox Jews, was to lead to major trouble in the second century BCE, after Palestine was captured from Egypt by the Seleucid Greeks of Syria. (page 215).

Just as in modern America most Jews use English rather than Hebrew in their religious services and rituals, so Greek was used by the Jews of Egypt, including Judea, in their religion (page 215).

Hellenic culture was much more attractive to the young Jews of Judea than the rigid strictures of their own religion. The Greek myths and deities, projections of the deepest infantile conflicts and family relations, etched into the unconscious mind of every person, deeply appealed to the people, just as the Canaanites myths had to their ancestors. The Tobiads led the wave of hellenization among the Jews. (page 220)

Jews always spoke the language of the land which was their home. When expulsions and persecutions eventually brought about a wider separation between the Jews and the non-Jews, the result was a growing dissimilarity between the intimate languages spoken by each group.(Grayzel quoted on page 458).

in the early fourth century, the Jews were divided into three main groupings. Those living in the Western Roman Empire of Italy, which comprised much of Western Europe, spoke mainly Latin, the lingua franca of the West, and the native European languages of the ethnic groups amongst whom they lived. The Jews of the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium, with its capital at Constantinople spoke mainly Greek, the language of the East. The Jews living in Sassanian Neo-Persian empire east of the Euphrates spoke mainly Aramaic. Hebrew continued to be spoken by Jewish scholars and by the people in their prayers. (page 337).

During the seventh and eighth centuries the lands inhabited by Jew in the Middle East and North Africa were conquered by the Muslim Arabs. Arabic became the language of the these Jews. (page 454).

Text extracts from A psychoanalytic history of the Jews By Avner Falk.

Judaism – an existential challenge

The Jewish population, followers of one of the oldest religions in the world, across countries and in Israel, today faces an existential challenge. With 0.25% of world population, i.e. less than 1.5 crore Jews left, in a world of more than 600 crore people, they have made enemies of their neighbours around their country.

The Jewish state, dependent on US largesse, hangs by a thin thread. Without Hitler, the world population of Jews would possibly have been not much better. Maybe 2.5 crores instead of 1.5 crores (at the risk of sounding insensitive). Maybe 0.5% of world population, instead of 0.25%. Also, must be remembered that Jewish studies in the modern context are affected by the ‘Jews as the eternal victims’ syndrome.

Genetic analysis of the Jewish populations

So, what is the reason for this fragile position of the Jewish population? One recent study states that

Admixture analysis based on binary and Y-STR haplotypes indicates a high mean proportion of ancestry from North African (10.6%) and Sephardic Jewish (19.8%) sources. Despite alternative possible sources for lineages ascribed a Sephardic Jewish origin, these proportions attest to a high level of religious conversion (whether voluntary or enforced), driven by historical episodes of social and religious intolerance, that ultimately led to the integration of descendants.

(from The Genetic Legacy of Religious Diversity and Intolerance: Paternal Lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula by Susan M. Adams,Elena Bosch,Patricia L. Balaresque,Stéphane J. Ballereau,Andrew C. Lee,Eduardo Arroyo,Ana M. López-Parra,Mercedes Aler,Marina S. Gisbert Grifo,Maria Brion,Angel Carracedo,João Lavinha,Begoña Martínez-Jarreta,Lluis Quintana-Murci,Antònia Picornell,Misericordia Ramon,Karl Skorecki,Doron M. Behar,Francesc Calafell andMark A. Jobling, Copyright 2008 The American Society of Human Genetics, The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 83, Issue 6, 725-736, 04 December 2008).

Another study concludes that the Jewish population shares a high level of common paternal similarities.

Several lines of evidence support the hypothesis that Diaspora Jews from Europe, Northwest Africa, and the Near East resemble each other more closely than they resemble their non-Jewish neighbors. The only exception was the Ethiopian Jews, who were affiliated more closely with non-Jewish Ethiopians and other North Africans.

Second, despite their high degree of geographic dispersion, Jewish populations from Europe, North Africa, and the Near East were less diverged genetically from each other than any other group of populations in this study. At the most basic level, the genetic distances observed among Jewish and non-Jewish populations can be interpreted as reflecting common ancestry, genetic drift, and gene flow. The latter two processes will tend to increase genetic distances among Jewish populations, whereas admixture will also have the effect of decreasing genetic distances between Jewish and non-Jewish populations.

Our results suggest that common ancestry is the major determinant of the genetic distances observed among Jewish communities, with admixture playing a secondary role. (from Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes By M. F. Hammer, A. J. Redd, E. T. Wood, M. R. Bonner, H. Jarjanazi, T. Karafet*, S. Santachiara-Benerecetti, A. Oppenheim, M. A. Jobling, T. Jenkins, H. Ostrer, and B. Bonné-Tamir)

Of course, it begs the question, was the Jewish population ever a significant part of global population? One writer who has addressed this question is James Carroll, in his book, Constantine’s sword. He estimates,

Jews accounted for 10 percent of the total population of the Roman Empire. By that ratio, if other factors had not intervened, there would be 200 million Jews in the world today, instead of something like 13 million. (He goes onto recount that the) potential demographic crisis facing the Jewish people is defined by the loss of the murdered millions, not only in the twentieth century, but in all others. (from Constantine’s sword By James Carroll, page 26-27, texts in brackets, mine).

Population growth and changes (of not just the Jews) are subject to interplay of complex demographic factors – like assimilation, disease, migration, reproduction rates and proselytization. Since these factors affect all human populations, further analysis of these factors may just reinforce current red herring theories.

Jews – the eternal victims?

Of course, Jews have not been the only population group in the world who have had to face the problems of epidemics, migration, assimilation, and conversion. What could have been a significant reason for the decline in the Jewish population over the centuries?

A 2ndlook at history points out (extracts above) that the Jewish populations gave up their language and culture ab initio. Within a few centuries of its foundation, they were giving up on their culture.

Interestingly, and apparently, language plays an important and crucial role in the expansion and growth of populations – as the Jewish case seems to suggest.

Those who don’t learn from history …

The Jewish history has invaluable lessons for Indians. For one, all those who think that English is God’s special gift to India (and mankind), should look at the eclipse of the Greek language. I am yet to discover the logic which shows that English will fare better than Greek, Spanish, Persian or Urdu.

Reducing the role of the Indian State

The massive subsidy given by the Indian state towards English language education needs to be phased out. Indian languages (all of them) should start getting back on their feet. The people of India, each individual will choose their language. No bureaucrat, politician, ‘intellectual’ will decide that. Finito. Completo. Terminato. Endlich. Eindig. ändlig.

The Indian language basket also calls for diversification. India needs to learn more foreign languages. The great ’software success story is actually two countries – US and UK who give between 70%-80% of Indian software business? This is coolie labour! We are missing out on the massive Japanese, French and the Spanish markets because we have not invested in those foreign languages. And we have missed out on computing in Indian languages, because we have not invested there either.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Israel As A Country Model For India

The Indian State has often been accused of being ‘soft on terror.’ We are frequently reminded how we should consider patterning India along hard lines like Israel - which has ‘zero tolerance’ policy on ‘terrorism’. As proof, the Israeli actions against the perpetrators of the Munich massacre. Or the capture of Eichmann. The air raid of Entebbe is another example that is referred to, with a glow in the eye.

Israel's Tenuous Existence

The first disqualification against accepting the Israeli State model is the fact it is heavily dependent on America, for fiscal and military aid - “since 1974 totals roughly $80 billion” and an article from Daily Times Of Pakistan says enviously “The United States has poured $140 billion into Israel since its formation”. That is about a US$56,000 for every Israeli family.

After all, (as NYT says)

America has vital long-term strategic interests in the Middle East. The gulf has well over 60 percent of the world’s proven conventional oil reserves and nearly 40 percent of its natural gas.

To some it may look like a boon, but is surely the kiss of death.

American policymakers began regarding Israeli strength as an American asset in the Cold War, they supported significant aid as a matter of strategy, not charity. … American aid continues to flow to Israel. … critics on the opposite end of the political spectrum argue that while aid to Israel may be tied to the best of intentions, it does more harm than good to the Jewish State by propping up a big and inefficient government and making Israel dependent upon the U.S.

For how long can any country, society, individual survive on foreign largesse? Note how during the 1973, Arab Israeli War, the tide of battle finally turned when the massive US airlift of weapons, tanks, spares happened! Which itself, is self-serving - “American assistance, emerging as a disjointed policy that urges a peaceful resolution to the conflict while boosting military aid to Israel.”

Another client state of US, Pakistan enviously records, that

“Israel is the only country that receives all of its U.S. aid in a single package, while others only receive it in quarterly installments.” It continues, “Most recipients of military aid are obliged to spend it in the US but Israel is permitted to spend 25 percent of what it receives to subsidize its own defence industry,”…

Israel's Future With Its Neighbours

The biggest Israeli failure is the state of permanent hostility it has engendered in the neighbourhood. Israel’s dysfunctional relationship with its neighbours has taken significant efforts from Israel - possibly, based on its superior ‘European’ extraction.

How long can Israel depend on US support which since

“1982, … has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions which were critical of Tel Aviv, a number that exceeds the total number of vetoes exercised by all other permanent member states put together.”

American support may change (linked to American decline?) with time - but Israel’s neighbourhood is not changing!

The Persecution Of Palestinians

The logic for the creation of Israel was persecution of Jews in Europe. Within 10 years, the same ‘persecuted’ Jews, allied themselves with their former persecutors and invaded Egypt - precipitating the Suez crisis. Thus the very logic of the creation of the Israeli state was corrupted within 10 years.

The subsequent occupation of neighbouring territories was a continuation of this policy of aggressive expansionism based on European and later American support.

Israel's population is less than Pune

Pune's official population of 45 lakhs is close to Israel's population of 72 lakhs.

The only logic for Israeli policy is the probable Israeli intention. Is it that they are not staying in the neighbourhood after (or when, if you prefer) American aid ceases.

India with a population of 110 crores, has no such option.

Monday, March 10, 2008

India Lowers Guard

1990

A ‘orientalist’ writer from Belgium, Koenraad Elst, waded into India. His books on Hinduism, Aryan culture, Islamic history in India were avidly lapped up by a section which was eager for Western approval. Elst’s blatant anti-Islamic agenda warmed the cockles of many hearts. LK Advani released Elst’s book in India. BJP’s proximity to Elst’s ideas has given it visibility which imbalances the discussion.

1991

Rajiv Gandhi had come back from Sriperumbudur in a coffin. Assam problem seemed beyond resolution. The common Indian had given up on Punjab. The 1984 anti Sikh riots only strengthened the negative outlook. Kashmir was simmering. The Indian electorate had given a fractured mandate. A hung Parliament. Corruption was endemic and every politician was an Untouchable – nobody or anything could touch them. There were no laws.

Indian economy was going downhill – and nothing seemed to get the economy out of the “Hindu rate of growth”. India was on the verge of a debt default. Indian debt was downgraded by Western rating agencies.

The Asian Tigers had done wonders – under US tutelage. China was furiously reforming – and succeeding at it. USSR 2 years ago had decided to retreat from Afghanistan. India’s faithful ally, Russia was breaking up. Many across the world shook their head and could be heard saying, “I knew … I told you … It had to happen …”

All bets on India were off.

1992

In this seige mentality, one fine day, a US Senator, Larry Pressler, announced at a press conference in New Delhi, that India was encircled by an Islamic coalition of 9 countries. The proxy war against India by Pakistan was at its height. This ‘Islamic Crescent’ (as Larry Pressler called it) first stunned India - and then stampeded its foreign policy.

Larry Pressler was seen as a friend of India - by Indians. He got some well-paying corporate board room positions - and he has kept in the back ground after that. But his press conference still rings. And Pressler’s proximity to Indian liberal establishment (which is close to both the BJP and the Congress), flanks India’s movement towards Western paranoia from the opposite direction. (Strangely, Google search, Yahoo search, Indiatimes search, cannot find any newspaper coverage for that press conference.)

Soon thereafter, India upgraded its relationship with Israel, (practically) abandoned the Palestinians (not to ignore West Asia’s own desire to cosy with the West) - and started getting closer to the US. The Vajpayee Government (with a historic tendency) continued with this rush to embrace the US.

There is too much tradition and culture for India to go down the demonisation path, but recent developments do call for consciousness on this account.

India’s Record - And the Reversal

India and its Government was in the vanguard of opposition to Apartheid, neo-colonialism, (especially in the Middle East). However, in the last 15 years, under the garb of ‘geo-strategic interests /initiatives /imperatives’, changed ’super power equations,’ ‘uni-polar world,’ India is losing its moral initiative - and equally importantly its long term interests. It is getting sucked into uni-directional relationships - which are going down.

Western Adventurism - The ImperativeLaRouche's Triple Curve

Without slavery, the West does not enjoy the manpower edge that it had till 1900. The loss of colonies from 1900-1950 has taken away the resource base and captive markets for Western dominance. Now with the collapse of Bretton Woods, the opacity in financial systems is diminished. The welfare state has put a significant burden on an aging Western population. With fading prowess on one side, and a resurgent Asia on the other, the US and EU are now at the cross roads. Is the West prepared to quietly fade away in the sunset?

Unlikely.

Indian Perceptions - Preparedness and Paranoia

Will this loss of power encourage some adventurism by the West? Are the various ‘co-operation’ agreements a sign of India becoming a client state of the West - again? What is the threat magnitude of this ‘cowboy imperative’? Does India need to prepare itself against an imperative of the ‘desert bloc’?

While the activities of these Western ‘friends’, sensitised India to the Islamic ‘threat’, it more importantly, has lowered the Indian guard against the resurgent Western encirclement.

American forces are based in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Diego Garcia - and of course Iraq. The wolf pack behaviour of pursuit of quarry does not allow co-operation between packs - but within the pack itself. So, while the Islamic crescent perception has some validity, the threat of The Star and The Cross is equal, if not greater.

Sometimes, ‘friends’ are more dangerous than a recognised opposition.

Moral Stature

Equally, India should not acquire the practices or memberships that have made recent history bloody and exploitative. While many civilisations have stumbled (Greeks, Romans, Egypt) and fallen by the wayside, India’s many comebacks, have been based on never losing moral stature - and it is late in the day to start down that path.

Concerns! Questions?

Is the ‘Islamic demonisation’ an attempt by the ‘wolf pack’ to separate a member of the herd and then go for the kill - like Iraq.

Is India getting co-opted in this ‘wolf pack hunt’?

Saturday, February 23, 2008

The Carving Of The Middle East

Iran Iraq CartoonThis cartoon which I saw on a blog, captures the entire charade about Iraq, Iran and the Middle East.

After WW1

Arthur James Balfour, Author of the Balfour Declaration

After the war, the victorious allies carved up the entire Ottoman Empire - which stretched from the Middle East to Central Asia to the Eastern Europe.

Out of the Ottaman Empire, Iraq was carved up and King Faysal was put on the throne. A British amateur Gertrude Margaret Lowthian Bell made the selection of the King Of Iraq. Gertrude Margaret Lowthian BellThis new King did not even know his kingdom - and he was taken around by his new makers. Similarly, an amateur like TE Lawrence (never mind the propaganda) was used to determine the fate of the Middle East.

WW1 resulted in the Balfour Declaration, which promised a Jewish homeland, to be carved out of the Ottoman Empire. Saudi Arabia was similarly made up.

Thus the entire Middle East was put on shaky political ground. Exploitative commercial contracts favoring Anglo Saxon bloc of countries were signed with these puppet governments - and the rest of the story is being played out for the last 90 years.TE Lawrence Of 'Arabia'

Turkey decided to go West - with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk mandating that all Turks must cut of their beards. Out of the fog of war came the the Russian Communists - which again the Anglo Saxon world tried to blame the rest of the world for.

The Western Leadership

Midway through WW1, by 1916, the heads of the Allied powers - Britain, France, and Russia had a change of government. Each of new governments had different agendas and ideas about the Middle East - in which the only interest that was not represented was that of the Middle East itself.

Britain, under Prime Minister, David Lloyd George could look at Middle East as the dominant super power of the period could - as imperial fodder. Georges Clemenceau, the French Premier, was diffident about colonial expansion pragmatically viewing French resources and capability in overextended and vulnerable to Germans.

The unforeseen elements were the Russians. The Communist leaders pulled out of the war. Russia was replaced by their future Cold War rival, United States into the war on the side of the Allies. American economic interests demanded opening of markets, closed to America by colonial powers. Woodrow Wilson (couched as his personal beliefs in self-determination) wanted 'independence' for the Middle East - for the US corporations to manipulate the Middle East, which they promptly did.

Leaders of the Middle East

One example was Emir Hussein. He could make the British believe that Emir Hussein could raise a force of a quarter million Arabs. He could deliver 3000-4000. Shaikh Faisal was another. Muhammed Sharif al-Faruqi was the third.

The Demonisation StartsIslamic Demonisation

After these destabilising decisions were taken, the Anglo Saxon world has been put their propaganda machine to work overtime. Demonising communism and now Islam. Without taking the responsibility for their own actions - and further interventions, creating further instability. Like the demonisation of the Jews before and the Red Indians after, this too is having disastrous effects - in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. And this process of demonization is a matter of concern to the rest of the world.

Is India getting co-opted in this demonization?

Gandhiji - And The Middle East Carving

Gandhiji saw this problem 90 years ago - and his support of the Khilafat movement was prescient. Today when some Indians join in this demonization, it is matter of ignorance - and a threat.

Start Of World War I

What triggered WW1 - common knowledge. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. How did so many other countries get involved? The Russian Tsar (related to the British Royal House and based on the support of) Britain, the Anglo Saxon Bloc and the French, supported political Serbian assassins, of Archduke Ferdinand of the Austro Hungarian Empire - and that started the World War I. Not some harmless gun shot that seemed to have triggered it off as victorious Anglo Saxon historians would have us believe.

The Assassination Team

WW1- Colour Pictures

The assasination plot included Gavrillio Princip, the actual 19-years old killer, Mehmed Mehmedbasic (a carpenter, unsure of his success, finally didnt do anything), 17 year old Vaso Cubrilovic, Nedelko Cabrinovic, all of 20 years old, Cvetko Popovic, an 18-year old student, 24-year old Danilo Ilic, the main organizer of the plot and Trifko Grabez, a 19-year old.

The name of the group was Black Hand, a circle of radicals in the army around Dimitrijevic-Apis, the man who led the murder of the Serbian royal couple in 1903. The other ring leader was Vojislav Tankosić organized the murders of Queen Draga's brother's; Dimitrijević Apis and Tankosić in 1913-1914 figure prominently in the plot to assassinate Franz Ferdinand.

What Would Happen Today

Would the US take no action if a mad assassin (imagine if he is Islamic) were to assassinate the US President-Elect. And what would the US do if (say, the) Governments of Russian or the China (or for that matter, India) were to support the assassins. Well a Balkan assassin did kill the Crown Prince (equivalent to the US President-Elect). The Russians, the Anglo Saxon Bloc and the French supported the assassins. What would happen if a Pakistani based terrorist group were to kill Prince Harry?

The Alliances Of WW1

French Colour Photos - WW1On one side were the Austro-Hungarian Empire ruled by the Habsburgs (whose heir apparent was killed), The Ottoman Empire (out of Turkey), which could obviously not support assassins of royalty - and Germany.

Britain immediately started aggressive posturing against Turkey (the Ottomans). On July 29, 1914, Churchill, then Lord Of Admiralty, seized two Dreadnought ships being built for the Ottomans in British shipyards for the Turkish navy. The Germans needed allies and to woo the Ottomans, presented them with two ships. Britain, France and Russia declared war on Turkey on October 31, 1914.

Supporting the assassins was the alliance of Russia, France, Britain, (and later) America, and sundry other European countries. With this act of brinkmanship, they took the world through the agony of a huge war, the price of which is being paid even today. The Middle East problems, the rise of Communism all came out of the World War I.

© with respective copyright holders. Copyright details embedded in the links.