5 ms·

Unfortunately for you Einstein supported Zionism, while his views shifted on how should be implemented by 1947 he certainly tried to persuade world leaders to s

Unfortunately for you Einstein supported Zionism, while his views shifted on how should be implemented by 1947 he certainly tried to persuade world leaders to support Israel [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_views_of_Albert_Einstein https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_views_of_Albert_Ei...

contingencies 2y ago
It seems you are questioning only the "...considering Zionism a self-destructive political ideology" final part of the final sentence, a necessarily concise summary of a whole person's lifetime views which is obviously skipping nuance. Well, hey, I'm the first to admit I never met the guy. I have also read that wikipedia page, which is probably not impartial or complete. My limited understanding is that he didn't want an Israeli state - "I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state". Later, he initially supported Israel (as did many fleeing Europe, including my own family), but never Israel-for-the-jews-to-the-exclusion-of-others. Later he was disgusted at the political leadership of this bent he saw emerging to dominate the political reality in the fledgling nation, which is what my GP comment referred to. He would without doubt be critical today, though it seems he wisely tried to stay out of politics where feasible. Probably I should have said "militant exclusionary Zionism" or some other phrase, but it seems everything is a loaded phrase these days in discussions touching on Israel. Edit reply to child: I can see clearly that quote must be taken out of context quite often. Perhaps you should imagine if you had lived somewhere for generations and then a bunch of foreigners show up from Europe and start altering the status quo, how exactly you the residents might feel about it. It seems peaceful protest and strikes had been carried out in living memory but the results were violence. So you can see what sort of tinderbox that would be. I don't think deploying historic quotes out of context in an attempt to allocate blame and transfer that to a modern context is in any way shape or form constructive, valid, useful or intellectually honest.
- yonisto 2y ago
  Are you sure you read the page? "He took the draft of a speech he was preparing for a television appearance commemorating the state of Israel's seventh anniversary with him to the hospital, but he did not live to complete it. In the draft he speaks about the dangers facing Israel and says “It is anomalous that world opinion should only criticize Israel’s response to hostility and should not actively seek to bring an end to the Arab hostility which is the root cause of the tension." I hope it helps
DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
It's complicated. Einstein opposed the creation of a Jewish state, but wanted Jewish immigration to Palestine to be allowed. On the whole, however, Einstein suffered from the same blind spot that many people in his time did: not paying enough attention to the rights of the native population of Palestine, which was more than 95% non-Jewish.
- yonisto 2y ago
  It's not complicated at all. His views shifted over time. He also was a product of his times: no one questioned the moral existence of USA, Australia or New-Zealand in regard with native population rights.
  - DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
    If the US had been established in the mid-20th century through naked colonialism, then yes, a great many people would question its moral right to exist. Israel was founded at a time when anticolonial movements worldwide were gaining strength. That made its founding - through the mass expulsion of the native population - an anachronism. Einstein was very clearly against the foundation of a Jewish state until it actually occurred. He accepted is establishment in the end, and like many people of the time, he glossed over the incredible injustice that had been done to the Palestinians in order to establish Israel. I do know that not everyone thought this way, though. Some of my own Jewish family members opposed to establishment of Israel at the time, precisely because they thought it was unjust to the Arab population.
    - yonisto 2y ago
      You are confusing reality with your own wishes: Many Jews actively opposed the creation of a Jewish nation; the Bund is just one example [0]. I’m not sure what your point is here—people are entitled to different opinions. However, Einstein actively persuaded world leaders to support the UN partition plan, which was before the founding of Israel. The founding of Israel resulted from the UN decision on the partition plan, which the Jews accepted while the Arabs rejected. The "mass expulsion" was a consequence of the war, similar to contemporary events in Europe (where 3 million ethnic Germans were displaced) and India (with approximately 20 million displaced). Additionally, you seem to overlook the 900,000 Jews displaced from Arab countries and areas that were meant to be part of Israel but ended up under Jordanian control. This is why, many people at the time (Einstein included) didn't hold the prevailing view that 80 years later is dominating the left. The U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada were undeniably created through colonialism. Live with it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Jewish_Labour_Bund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Jewish_Labour_Bund
aguaviva 2y ago
Unfortunately for you the flavor of Zionism he endorsed (which preferred a binational rather than a Jewish state) hasn't had any political significance since Israel's independence. If he were to espouse those same beliefs today, he would likely be seen as "anti-Zionist", if not outright antisemitic within Israel and its support base abroad. So no, one does not get to say "Einstein supported Zionism" per the latter's modern definition and context.

contingencies 2y ago

It seems you are questioning only the "...considering Zionism a self-destructive political ideology" final part of the final sentence, a necessarily concise summary of a whole person's lifetime views which is obviously skipping nuance. Well, hey, I'm the first to admit I never met the guy. I have also read that wikipedia page, which is probably not impartial or complete. My limited understanding is that he didn't want an Israeli state - "I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state". Later, he initially supported Israel (as did many fleeing Europe, including my own family), but never Israel-for-the-jews-to-the-exclusion-of-others. Later he was disgusted at the political leadership of this bent he saw emerging to dominate the political reality in the fledgling nation, which is what my GP comment referred to. He would without doubt be critical today, though it seems he wisely tried to stay out of politics where feasible. Probably I should have said "militant exclusionary Zionism" or some other phrase, but it seems everything is a loaded phrase these days in discussions touching on Israel. Edit reply to child: I can see clearly that quote must be taken out of context quite often. Perhaps you should imagine if you had lived somewhere for generations and then a bunch of foreigners show up from Europe and start altering the status quo, how exactly you the residents might feel about it. It seems peaceful protest and strikes had been carried out in living memory but the results were violence. So you can see what sort of tinderbox that would be. I don't think deploying historic quotes out of context in an attempt to allocate blame and transfer that to a modern context is in any way shape or form constructive, valid, useful or intellectually honest.

yonisto 2y ago
Are you sure you read the page? "He took the draft of a speech he was preparing for a television appearance commemorating the state of Israel's seventh anniversary with him to the hospital, but he did not live to complete it. In the draft he speaks about the dangers facing Israel and says “It is anomalous that world opinion should only criticize Israel’s response to hostility and should not actively seek to bring an end to the Arab hostility which is the root cause of the tension." I hope it helps

DiogenesKynikos 2y ago

It's complicated. Einstein opposed the creation of a Jewish state, but wanted Jewish immigration to Palestine to be allowed. On the whole, however, Einstein suffered from the same blind spot that many people in his time did: not paying enough attention to the rights of the native population of Palestine, which was more than 95% non-Jewish.

yonisto 2y ago
It's not complicated at all. His views shifted over time. He also was a product of his times: no one questioned the moral existence of USA, Australia or New-Zealand in regard with native population rights.
- DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
  If the US had been established in the mid-20th century through naked colonialism, then yes, a great many people would question its moral right to exist. Israel was founded at a time when anticolonial movements worldwide were gaining strength. That made its founding - through the mass expulsion of the native population - an anachronism. Einstein was very clearly against the foundation of a Jewish state until it actually occurred. He accepted is establishment in the end, and like many people of the time, he glossed over the incredible injustice that had been done to the Palestinians in order to establish Israel. I do know that not everyone thought this way, though. Some of my own Jewish family members opposed to establishment of Israel at the time, precisely because they thought it was unjust to the Arab population.
  - yonisto 2y ago
    You are confusing reality with your own wishes: Many Jews actively opposed the creation of a Jewish nation; the Bund is just one example [0]. I’m not sure what your point is here—people are entitled to different opinions. However, Einstein actively persuaded world leaders to support the UN partition plan, which was before the founding of Israel. The founding of Israel resulted from the UN decision on the partition plan, which the Jews accepted while the Arabs rejected. The "mass expulsion" was a consequence of the war, similar to contemporary events in Europe (where 3 million ethnic Germans were displaced) and India (with approximately 20 million displaced). Additionally, you seem to overlook the 900,000 Jews displaced from Arab countries and areas that were meant to be part of Israel but ended up under Jordanian control. This is why, many people at the time (Einstein included) didn't hold the prevailing view that 80 years later is dominating the left. The U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada were undeniably created through colonialism. Live with it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Jewish_Labour_Bund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Jewish_Labour_Bund

aguaviva 2y ago

Unfortunately for you the flavor of Zionism he endorsed (which preferred a binational rather than a Jewish state) hasn't had any political significance since Israel's independence. If he were to espouse those same beliefs today, he would likely be seen as "anti-Zionist", if not outright antisemitic within Israel and its support base abroad. So no, one does not get to say "Einstein supported Zionism" per the latter's modern definition and context.