The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Could you post more on this? (What measure of 'radical', what kind of data, pre-Gaza-pullout or after?) *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
I read it in Haaretz. By radical they meant people that would declare themselves as ready to fight the state of Israel if anybody tried to removed them from the Land God gave to the Jews.
I will try to get the statistics and post them.
It would also be interesting to recall how many of the settlers live just because the money they recieve is huge and how many for political reason.
In Gaza, residents were divided in these three groups and there were hardly anyone ready to fight. and mostly were there for political reasons (only few were there for the big house and the garden they got. In the West Bank there are people ready to fight...but there is also a lot of people whoa re jus there because housing and schooling is almost free
I hope I will find them.
A pleasure I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude
For the record, of the three groups you name, my usage of "radical" involved both the willing-to-fight and not-willing-to-fight political groups. If the economically-motivated are a 60% majority in the West Bank, that would be indeed a sign for optimism. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
If the economically-motivated are a 60% majority in the West Bank, that would be indeed a sign for optimism.
Haaretz Poll
Now you will need to slice the other 65-70 %. I would say 20% were radical and the rest political as in Gaza. But I do not find the other poll now.
First, this separates out only settlers beyond the fence, not the entire West Bank.
It appears from the poll that only 35% are willing to leave (25% immediately) - at least, unless the settlers have some other reason to reject that specific proposal of money compensation for moving.
The overall figures for Israelis are much higher, which may imply that support for it is higher among fenced-in settlers too, but I'm not sure what that would imply for a plan valid for the fenced-in settlements. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
They put the figure of radicals at 23%
Settlers poll areas
SO it indeed reaches 20%
c. And the most compelling finding: 53% of the settlers in Judea and Samaria think the evacuation-compensation law should be applied to all the settlements in Judea and Samaria.
That's indeed most compelling!
But my pessimist soul found something worrying, too (unfortunately not numerised):
In addition large majority of the respondents didn't know whether Ariel, Maale Adumim, Ofra or Kochav Yair are settlements or not.
I am never positive or negative. But where not for the mutual hate isralis and palestenians have , a hugemajority agree on almost anything except for Jerusalem.
As Migeru siad,among the settlers there are more radicals (10% more roughly) and more politically motivated (although not against the state). the figures are bad, but the process can be implemented... you only need will..
It has always been land for refugees (Demographic solution) and then...the problem (symbolic and religious):
Jerusalem....
If this is the assumption Peretz is making, it's in fact beyond brilliant. Because now, the radicals would have to follow majority rule which is against their own demographic designsr. He's using their strategy against them.
You see, there aren't enough radicals, thankfully. They show up at the very beginning when an "outpost" is founded. They do all the hard grunt work, financing, legal processes, etc. of establishing the settlement and then they rely on generous Israeli government subsidies (which used to flow like a river of milk and honey) to lure economic migrants, a lot of whom have been apolitical immigrants from Eastern Europe, Russia and central Asia.
Once that gets done, they move on to the next settlement. They do try to spread themselves so that they maintain ideological influence in every settlement, which is why they never can form a majority in any major settlement.
My guess is that, at this very moment, they are doing their best to find new outpost with small, radical populations that could form a majority and at the same time put out a serious call for their mainland Israelis to move over to the settlements. At the very least, this will have a huge impact on their immigrant-importing operations. "Political Violence is a perfectly legitimate answer to the persecution handed down by the dignitaries of the state." -Riven Turnbull
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 17
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 10 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 1 6 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 3 32 comments
by Oui - Sep 6 3 comments
by gmoke - Aug 25 1 comment
by Oui - Sep 19
by Oui - Sep 18
by Oui - Sep 1723 comments
by Oui - Sep 154 comments
by Oui - Sep 151 comment
by Oui - Sep 1315 comments
by Oui - Sep 13
by Oui - Sep 124 comments
by Oui - Sep 1010 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 103 comments
by Oui - Sep 10
by Oui - Sep 92 comments
by Oui - Sep 84 comments
by Oui - Sep 715 comments
by Oui - Sep 72 comments
by Oui - Sep 63 comments