07 October 2010

Loyalty oath? Arse kissing time, folks!

It certainly looks like Bibi's made his mind:

Next cabinet meeting will see ministers debate legal revision demanding aspiring Israeli citizens pledge allegiance to 'Jewish, democratic Israel.' Decision lauded by Right, slammed by Left, Arab parties.
While the details of the oath, such as who exactly will be liable to pledge it for the citizenship, its precise formula and circumstances are not yet clear, some of the details are known:
  1. It's a pledge of loyalty to 'Jewish, democratic Israel'. Bit of oxymoron, that, but let's let it go for now.
  2. It's needed at this moment in Israel's history about as much as a bout of shingles. And about as useful.
  3. If, indeed, as some people say, the timing is chosen by Bibi to sweeten the new freeze in settlement construction for Lieberman (and possibly others), Bibi is even more pathetic than I thought before.
  4. The pledge is almost everything most of its detractors say: insulting, harmful, insufficient to cement Israel's status as a Jewish democratic state, anxious, anti-civilian, a political decision and more...
  5. Almost, but not quite everything: it's not a racist pledge. To start with, there is nothing unique in the pledge, other countries also demand a pledge from the candidates for citizenship. Then, of course, there is the issue of "Jewish and democratic" - but it's still not a race issue, rather one of stupidity.

To make the long story short: I have already promised Mr Lieberman free access to my arse for kissing purposes, should he continue with this and other wannabe-fascist ideas. He and other supporters of this oath are welcome to set up an appointment. A written and duly signed confirmation of poison sacks excision - a precondition.

On the other side of the political spectrum: MK Barakeh is cordially invited to join the above mentioned (that's for "racism" shout-out).


Dvar Dea said...

<p><span>I agree with all the points you made except point 1.</span><span><span> </span></span>
</p><p><span>I would add that it could be used as a fast track for citizenship for work migrants. Whether that is good or bad, I’ll leave that to each person’s individual opinion.</span></p>

SnoopyTheGoon said...

I'm confused a bit here, DD: what part of point 1 do you disagree with? That "Jewish and democratic" is somewhat of oxymoron?

Point 1 is not much of a statement anyway.

Dvar Dea said...

<span>There is nothing contradictory in Jewish and democratic. Jewish is not a philosophy of government; it is a peoplehood. Communist democratic, totalitarian democratic, these are oxymoron. <span> </span></span>

SnoopyTheGoon said...

If you read the many articles dedicated to the subject, Bibi wants to push this point to stress the necessity of recognition by PA of Israel as Jewish state. While I don't mind such recognition - in fact it could be helpful, the method is quite vile.

shlem said...

Interesting issue. 

1. In many countries aspiring citizens have to swear allegiance to an old foreign woman who lives abroad and is called Liz.  Personally I had to do it twice.

In comparison to that particular requirement, the proposed Israili oath is full of common sense. 

2. "Jewish" means different things to different people.  To me it means "someone who believes himself Jewish and supports the Jewish project". 

For several centuries "Jewish project" = Judaism.  Over the last 100 years gradually at first and decisively after WWII, the meaning has changed.  Today "Jewish project" = Israel.

I don't see the statement as an oximoron.  It effectively means an expectation that the new citizens will assimilate within Israel; the approach identical to the one that French aspire to in France.

SnoopyTheGoon said...

This oath definitely means a lot of thing to a lot of people. To Bibi it's just means to get out of a corner he painted himself into with Barack on one side and Lieberman on the other.

Just re France: notice that France, unlike most of the rest of the world, is empathic on being a secular democracy. We here are not...

shira said...

<span>On GALATZ this morning they played statements from PA officials saying they were pleased about the loyalty oath because it means that BiBi is going to settle on settlements - which is why he is giving this to Lieberman. btw, this proposal either wont change anything in the existing law besides the number of words or, in worst case scenario, the high court would prevent it from becoming the law. get a constitution already!</span>
<p><span> </span>

David All said...

This may turn out okay if the proposed oath is, as Shlem mentions, something that immigrants to Israel have to swear to when they become citizens. In the US, immigrants have to swear an oath of loyality to the US and renounce all loyalities to their former country when they become American citizens*. As long as it is kept to new citizens and not have every Israeli swear to it, which would probably be a disaster, this proposed alliegance oath should be okay.

*When a friend of mine in Texas went through her citizenship ceremony several years ago, the Federal Judge who presided over it at the end congratulated them all on becoming citizens of the United States and have the great sense to be residents of Texas! 

SnoopyTheGoon said...

The point is, David, that its' unclear yet who is to be the intended target of this idiotic oath.

Timing of the whole issue is another matter I've mentioned... why now?

shira said...

<p><span>Isn't Judaism named after the tribe of Judea? And it is not a universal religion, but is bound to the land it was founded on. This religion is also a culture and doesn't resemble the same definition as Christianity and Islam - not that this changes the fact that it's a stupid idea but it is a point to consider... I think so anyway</span>...</p>