УTheа Logic of the Law of ReturnФ

 

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

 

ааааааааааа

Although the current Law of Return has enabled hundreds of thousands of gentiles related to a Jewish grandfather to enter Israel, I shall show that David Ben-GurionТs rationale for the Law of Return provides a logical justification for limiting those who vote and hold office in Israel to Jews.

ааааааааааа

When Ben-Gurion introduced the Law of Return in the Knesset in 1950, he set forth its historical and philosophical justification as follows:а УThis law does not provide for the State to bestow the right to settle in Israel upon the Jew living abroad; it affirms that this right is inherent in him from the very fact of his being a Jew; the State does not grant the right of return to the Jews of the Diaspora.а This right preceded the State; this right built the State; its source is to be found in the historic and never-broken connection between the Jewish people and their homeland.Ф

 

аааа аааааа Since only Jews have an inherent right to settle in IsraelЦЦa right that transcends the StateЦЦthe logic of this right prohibits the Knesset from passing any law or acting on any principle that could demographically deprive Jews of that right.а Yet this is exactly what happened in 1952 when the Knesset passed the Citizenship Law.а While affirming that only Jews have an inherent right to Israeli citizenship, the Citizenship Law contradicts the logic of that right by making it possible for non-Jews to obtain citizenship, hence to vote, hold office, and shape the laws of the supposed-to-be Jewish State.а Israel was thereby made a state for Jews and non-Jews alikeЦЦthe case of any multicultural democracy.а The Citizenship Law thus provides the ground for de-nationalizingа Judaism or for de-Judaizing Israel.

аааа аааааа

Inasmuch as Judaism, unlike Christianity, is a nationality and not merely a religion, only members of that nationality, i.e. Jews, should make the laws of the Jewish State (while securing the personal, civil, and religious rights of non-Jews.)а From this it would follow that only Jews may rightly be citizens of Israel, just as only ethnic Japanese may be citizens of Japan.а

 

It so happens, however, that the concept of citizenship is foreign to Judaism.а Because Judaism is a unique philosophy and system of behavior, any person, regardless of race or ethnicity, can become a Jew and participate in IsraelТs governing institutions by learning the Torah and living according to its precepts.аа

ааааааааааа

It should be emphasized, therefore, that unlike the former apartheid laws of South Africa, the Law of Return is not racist if only because any non-Jew, as just indicated, can become Jewish through conversion.а It should also be emphasized that at stake in Israel is the cultural self-preservation of the Jewish people.а

 

ааааааааааа The Citizenship Law of 1952 avoids this issue.а By making it possible for non-Jews to become citizens of Israel and eventually transform Israel into a non-Jewish entity, the Citizenship Law negates the only justification of IsraelТs re-establishment in 1948.а In fact, in principle, the Citizenship Law violates the November 1947 UN Resolution recognizing the establishment of a Jewish State in УPalestineФ!а

ааааааааааа

It follows from these considerations that any Israeli government based on the premise that Israel is the Уstate of its citizensФ rather than the state of the Jews stands in violation of international law and must be deemed illegitimate!

ааааааааааа

Turning from rigorous logic to ethnic considerations, it is will be evident to any sensible or unprejudiced person that to grant citizenship to ethnic groups having the most antagonistic beliefs and values is to make nonsense of the concept of citizenship and of nationality.а It is to strip citizenship of any dignity and citizens of national identity and solidarity.а When the felt differences among various people are more significant than what they have in common, nationhood is impossible.а Democracies which attempt to erase such differences become despotic.а Alternatively, a democracy that ignores such differences deprives itself of any rationality, to say nothing of domestic tranquillity.

аааа аааааа

This is precisely the tendency of Contemporary Democracy as opposed to Classical Democracy.а In contrast to the multicultural and moral disarray of Contemporary Democracy, Classical Democracy involves the rule of an ethnically distinct people, a people united not only by language, but by endogamous patterns of marriage and by shared beliefs and values rooted in a common past -- the basis of national loyalty.а Clearly the Jews and Moslems of Israel do not constitute a single people; indeed, they belong to clashing civilizations.а

ааааааааааа

Making Moslems citizens of a Jewish state is even more absurd than making Jews citizens of any Moslem state, considering only the disparity in their respective birthrates.а Moslem states bar Jews from citizenship, and reasonably so.а For just as only Jews are qualified to make the laws of a Jewish StateЦЦthink of the knowledge and reverence required to preserve the Jewish tradition, its religious precepts and practices, its methods of education, the memory of its great teachers and leadersЦЦso only Moslems are qualified to make the laws of any Moslem state.а

аааааааааааааааа ааааааааааааааааааа

Now, it is a fact that the vast majority of IsraelТs Moslem citizens openly identify themselves as УPalestinians,Ф and that their Arab representatives in the Knesset are openly committed to IsraelТs demise as a Jewish state.ааа That these Arabs should nonetheless be granted the equal POLITICAL rights of Jews is a travesty of justice.

аааа аааааа

Since the Jewish State justly belongs exclusively to the Jewish people, the fundamental law of this state must institutionalize Jewish governance as its paramount and permanent national principle.а Otherwise, the Law of Return is meaningless.

ааааааааааа