Let us begin with the most elementary question: when is someone indigenous? The institutionalized definition of 'indigenous' as written by the United Nations.
But, when you answer from a chronological point of view, the answer looks like this:
If there's no answer to this question, then the person may be indigenous to the disputed place. Because, why do we all know maps like the map here on the left? 'Indigenous' is adjective and refers to the notion of a place-based human ethnic culture that has not migrated from its homeland, and is not a settler or colonial population. The map shows very clear that migration began from regions in Africa like Kenya. The institutional definition erases this crucial part. In fact, we're all are descendents of the very first migrants who started settle anywhere in the world no matter if they are in a stage of development to become the modern-day humans. Without them, we all wouldn't be where we all are today. We prefer to describe all people in the world as modern-day descendants of the very first migrant-settlers. And, so are the very first people in the disputed area that is named Palestine by one side and Israel by others. The area is part of a region that historians describe as Semitic. But, what is Semitic, and who is such a person?
SEMITISM Before we continue it should be noted that Judaism is an offshoot as a result of a merge between several tribal beliefs that where in what was then Canaan, and after participating tribes, including the Hebrew tribe of Abraham, reached an covenant in which they agreed to accept one god. So, Judaism is not Hebrew as that is the name of the tribe Abraham belonged to. The name of the tribe refers to the language they spoke: Hebrew.
The question is, does a person but who is Jewish always remain Semitic? The answer is simply no as there is a term only historians appear to know, namely historical continuity. What does that mean? Someone remains Semitic when the person is born in the region but not from a migrant, settler or colonist; continuously remains to have a life in the region, so never have left and never will leave the region.
During the Roman occupation, the very ancestors of today's Palestinians were Christians who did not flee their habitat. In a way they have a historical continuity despite that their roots lay in the migration of people from ancient Egypt and ancient Arabic into the area that was then a blanket of tribal territories.
ROOTS OF ANTI-SEMITISM So, where does "anti-Semitism" in modern history come from? In the existence of everything, each has always an opposite or an complementary. It is no different when it comes to politics, the religionization of politics, or the politicization of religion. The roots of "anti-Semitism" in modern history lays in the period as a response to the politicization of the religion of Judaism into an ideology in 1897 known as Zionism. It was invented by an Hungarian as a response to the mass migration between 1880 and 1914 (see map on the right). But, it is the British Arthur Balfour who used the ideology in 1917 to create the Palestinian problem that is still today. The first Zionist congress took place in the concert hall of the Stadtcasino Basel, Switzerland on August 29, 1897 convened by the inventor of Zionism, Theodor Herzl. The congress was also attended by an unknown American who brought Zionism into his own country United States. It is Louis D. Brandeis, one of the directors of the American Zionist organization Hadassah who became a leader in the American Zionism. The strongest advocacy but in relation to the Israelis is in the United States where more Zionist organizations are active than in Europe. Many of these American organization are deep penetrated in the educational and political landscape of the U.S. The danger of Zionism is the failure to realize that the ideology is an religionized political version of globalism and even an religionized political version of nationalism in particular in countries like the United States. It is obsessively focused on achievement in seeking authority while disregarding the effects and consequences on societies, democratic systems and freedoms. We view international declarations, conventions and covenants against "anti-Semitism" therefore as based on (social-) political views. They do not reflect nor represent the chronology of historical facts, and therefore suspiciously mainly referring to criticism against the Israelis. These international approaches only contribute to the activities by Zionist groups who now see "anti-Semitism" as an 'legitimate' weapon to silence criticism. How is "anti-Semitism" used on a national level? The best way to explain is putting the answer simple and plain so that every reader can recognize his or her own situation. You have democracy, that means if your country has one. Democracy includes holding elections to vote for whoever you want to represent you. But, voting for whoever is based on your views, your wishes and your expectations and how they all reflect in the 'promises' of those you wish to represent you. The whole electoral process ends with the forming of a new parliament and/or a new government with people voters believe that they will represent them. Unfortunately, that is rarely the case in particular when a government follows a course that does not reflect nor represent that what is the majority in its country. But, when it comes to the Palestinians, Zionist organizations have done their job already for years and continues to do so to keep every new elected government or even a candidate focused on the Israelis. If such developments not only persist but also intensify, such always leads to counter-actions. This situation is deep rooted in American politics in relation to the Israelis.
PSEUDO ANTI-SEMITISM On October 7, 2023 an attack was carried out an a music festival that took place close to the Gaza border but on Israeli territory. Netanyahu declared war against Hamas after the attack. But, pro-Israelis and Israelis staunchly refuse to confront themselves with the fact that the Israelis are at war in all times as the Australian migrant Zionist, Mark Regev have said to a British news channel when he was the spokesperson of the Israeli occupying power in 2008. Another fact is that the Israelis are still war belligerent since 1967 as they never have signed peace with those they still occupy including those in Gaza. The declaration is also false for another reason as Hamas is not a country. It is an entity governing a territory, the United Nations have designated as under occupation. That makes the claim by the German federal government, the American government, the British government and the European Commission, that the Israelis have the right to defend themselves obsolete. The claim does not meet the requirements as stated in Art. 51 of the UN Charter. During the first week of Netanyahu's war, an information war broke out after the Israelis described the attack as those by "Hamas terrorists" and many pro-Israeli media adopted the slur without fact checking.. This war escalated the most in the United States where Zionist groups have a dominant influence in the politics of conservatist Republicans in the US, in the politics of the Conservatists United Kingdom where the Palestinian problem is created in 1917, and in Germany that choose to be remained shackled with its war past the Israelis are profiteering from. The German government led by Olaf Scholtz was the first in Europe who took actions against pro-Palestinian demonstrations, saying they are "anti-Semitic". France under Emmanuel Macron followed suit but because of a different historical background. The French are former colonizers of African Muslim countries like Algeria and Tunisia. The war in Gaza has triggered Islamophobia in France and pseudo Anti-Semitism in Germany and in the United States as. But, it is in the United States, and in particular ahead of the upcoming presidential elections, where pseudo Anti-Semitism has become rampant. It is pseudo anti-Semitism because Palestinians are Semitic people. However, it is by white people and, therefore, pseudo anti-Semitism in the style of the Israeli racist-leaning apartheid. But we see developments which are more worrisome. Zionist organizations in the United States have changed their course after seeing the number and size of demonstrations for ceasefire and protests against Biden's involvement in the mass destruction by Netanyahu in Gaza rising. They now push the GOP Republicans to conflate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism as one and the same. Such approach does not only infringe the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. It is an act of robbing everyone's right to have own thoughts and views, only to press the hateful views, something we know from Orwellian and other SF movies. It is also comparable to the totalitarian approach in China or in North Korea where nearly every person speaks and thinks within the view of the dictators. And when we look into the invention of Fascism, what does it tell us? In the context of Zionism, it looks like this:
|
No one is indigenous because the question suppose not to begin with who was or is the first there where it is disputed. The question is, where did the first person of all those descendants of that person come from?
Semitism is widely explained as "the fact or quality of being Jewish" ". Semitic" is adjective and refers to a language family and cultural group that includes several related languages. Semitic languages are part of the Afroasiatic language family and are spoken in the Middle East, North Africa, and some parts of the Horn of Africa.
Jews do not meet this requirement as they fled when the Romans invaded Palestine and annexed it as a province. They fled to Spain and from there into Europe. Their (renewed) historical continuity began in Spain. So, if you leave your habitat, no matter the reason, your historical continuity stops. From that moment you are no longer Semitic Jew but a migrant Jew. The example map on right about the Jewish migration between 1880 and 1914 shows that these people remained migrant Jews, not longer Semitic Jews.