THE MONARCH IS NO FOOL, & HE IS SOLIDLY BACKED BY THE EMPIRE– three sentences (with numerous parentheses)

bibi-4pics

He is no fool (though many of his opponents think he is & deride him publicly accordingly), the four-times elected (presently in his third time in a row) monarch (surely the correct word, “a sole and absolute ruler of a state or nation”, which by now for all practical purposes I’d say he is) of the Zionist State (I prefer not to use the name this state has in my opinion usurped & has no real right to, because it has for millennia been the Hebrew name for all Jewry in the world, most of whom live outside & are not represented by that state), Mr Rightson Godgiven (this is a fair Englishing of his Hebrew name; look up Yahu).

In many ways, he’s a genius, & has proved himself to be a superb manipulator not only within the Zionist State (where he has securely established an administration whose functionaries do his bidding, where the taxes of citizens pay for the subsidizing of settlers in the occupied “West Bank” while the health, welfare, educational; cultural & social needs of the citizens within the State proper are ignored, where activities against his policies & practices are suppressed &/or punished, where an indoctrinated &/or terrified populace is continually conned into not feeling compassion or objecting to the continuing brutality of the continuous occupation & the continuing non-acknowledgment of the Nakba that has been ongoing for almost 70 years, & of the Zionist State’s responsibility for it, where everything that a humane observer would excoriate & rage about is allowed to continue through the power of fear &/or the Big Lie of “the nation-state of the Jewish people”, to the extent that most of the populace don’t even feel complicity in the crimes against humanity their state is continuously committing) but also in the international arena, as his latest triumph in getting Egypt to withdraw its resolution from the Security Council agenda yesterday.

Except that here (as in numerous previous ventures & interventions by him outside of & on behalf of the Zionist State) he mightn’t have succeeded had there not been powerful interests who do not want to see the Zionist State’s power in Palestine & in the Middle East weakened, not because they favor or love or even care for Zionism as such (though having more “white” Jews there might seem better to & for them than having it all inhabited by “black” Arabs), but because there is more profit & power for them if things continue as they are. As monarch of the Zionist State he has solid backing from the “Western” global neo-liberal Empire…

Advertisements

Settlements? התנחלות (hitnaxhlút) is not the same as התישבות (hityashvút)

I think it’s important to stress that the Hebrew word התנחלות (hitnaxhlút), generally translated as settlement, refers specifically to Israeli-Jewish settling on Palestinian land occupied by Israel in 1967, & is radically different in meaning & spirit than the Hebrew word התישבות (hityashvút) that denotes any kind of settling and was the only word used for Jewish settlement in Palestine prior to the establishment of the State of Israel & still denotes settlement on land within the “Green Line”.

Both are modern nounal verbs (or verbal nouns), & are ‘reflexive’, meaning that they denote ‘making oneself such-&-such’. Both, too, stem from biblical roots with very strong connotations.

התישבות (hityashvút) stems from the root ישב (yasháv), to sit or dwell, & means the act of settling oneself, establishing one’s home somewhere. From the same root comes the word ישוב (yishuv) which means a place of settling or settlement, be it a village, a commune, a town or a city. In the plural  all such places are called yishuvím. Also, in pre-Israel Palestine, the entire Jewish population & its institutions were known as the Yishuv, the Settling.

But התנחלות (hitnaxhlút) stems from the root נחל (naxhál), to receive a tract of land as a rightful inheritance, & actually means to make oneself the receiver (& in practice the taker) of such a tract. There are many biblical references to such tracts – נחלה (naxhaláh) in the singular, נחלות (naxhalót) in the plural – given by ‘God’ to the Israelites, to the different tribes, to families, & to individuals. The use of this term implies that the takers are actually accepting what has been given to them by ‘God’. At the same time, it is a blatant & shameless, aggressive term that does not hide the fact that what it refers to is appropriation of land that can then be passed by inheritance to succeeding generations. Another interesting fact is that the same word is used both for the act of taking land in this way & for the settlement that is established in such a way. Thus ‘settlements’ in the Occupied Territories are called התנחלויות (hitnaxhluyót).

I know that it is too late to change the current usage in English. Also, there is no equivalent English word to translate the Hebrew word התנחלות (hitnaxhlút). (The closest might be something like appropriation for the act, & colony for the place so appropriated; it would need to be a word that also projected the arrogance implicit in the Hebrew word, the sense of divine right &/or duty to obey a divine commandment that is felt by the more fervent “settlers” if not by the opportunistic land-grabbers who have jumped on their bandwagon.) But I do think this is something that people who think & care about the situation in Palestine, but don’t know Hebrew. should know about.