The camel grazing issues remind me of issues in the US surrounding cattle grazing on public land near water. Obviously in the US there are areas of public land where cattle grazing is allowed, with permits and rules, but generally the rule is that they have to be kept away from creek beds to prevent damaging the ecosystem there. Is that any different in Braverman's conception?
Similarly, connected to very little else, moose and elk are similarly tall and leggy to camels, and very dangerous to hit with a car. The rule always went that between a deer and a car, the car wins, but between a moose and a car, the moose wins
This is a woman clearly deeply sunk into her circle, writing in their jargon with no idea (or, more likely, no care) that to outsiders it's like a foreign language, full of assumptions that she doesn't think need to be proved. Here are a couple of examples just from this response:
"far removed from the violent schemes of the settler colonial project"
Just look at how many "proven" assumptions are packed into that one sentence: That "settler colonial projects" exist, that Israel- in the Negev!- is one of them, that they have "schemes" which are "violent," etc. etc.
"the local Bedouin communities and their more-than-human traditions"
What does that even *mean*? I mean, to be honest, it sounds a bit...*racist*, no? That Bedouin are somehow better than Jews or something?
"The Jewish past most certainly includes domesticated camels - they are mentioned in the Bible!"
I'll do you one better: The Bible is full of references to Arabs and Bedouin. (Obviously more like "Semites who travelled around the desert," but Arabs sometimes even by that name.) Every Jewish schoolchild knows that Rashi says that when Avraham saw the three angels, he assumed they were Arabs wandering in the desert.
That leads us to another point that this great scholar seems not to realize: Any conflict between Bedouin and Israelis is far, far more easily explained as an aspect of a conflict that has been going on all around Planet Earth for about as long as there have been human beings: settled people vs. nomads. Even Tanach talks about this. There is an idea that the story of Kayin and Hevel itself is a metaphor for this conflict, Kayin being the settled farmer and Hevel being the nomadic shepherd. The references in the Yosef story to the Egyptians not liking shepherds is probably a reference to this. And of course this goes on to this day vis a vis Gypsies and related groups. Some even say the old "town vs. gown" conflict is an aspect of this.
Point being, these things will happen whenever civilization meets those who don't want to fit into civilization, and boy do the Bedouin not want to be part of civilization. It is nice when accommodations can be reached to let the "wild men" be themselves- we all have a little justified romance of such things, and maybe even some species memory of it- but at certain points the line has to be drawn. Just because one is a Bedouin doesn't mean he gets to steal a car, for example. (I choose that example deliberately.) And, yeah, a little control of your camels would be good. Most of us don't even get to *own* a camel.
I wrote in a comment on another post that the attitude towards Bedouin in *1001 Arabian Nights* is entirely negative. They are presented as almost sub-human.
The British and the Ottomans had trouble with the Bedouin and tried to suppress their ways. I think that the Mamluks did as well. Maybe the problem is the one thing in common -- the Bedouin themselves.
There was another set of nomads who had an impact in Eretz Yisrael. The Mongols paid a visit in 1260 CE. I don't know how much damage they caused. Two years earlier they had totally destroyed Mesopotamia and that area has yet to recover; they had also sacked Damascus and Sidon. Eretz Yisrael had been ravaged by almost two centuries of nonstop war among Seljuks, Fatimids, Crusaders, Ayyubids, and Khwarazmians so it isn't clear there was much left to ravage. :( But in any case, the Battle of Ain Jalut was a victory for the Mamluks against the Mongols and it was the first Mongol defeat that was never reversed. Interestingly, evidence discovered a just decades ago indicated that much of the Mongol Army had been withdrawn northward before the battle because of a lack of fodder for their animals in the summer!
Jerusalem is still dotted with Mamluk guard posts. (They were there to guard farms that were distant from the walls and important routes.) We pass some of them, marked by the Antiquities Authority, on our walks.
The Ottomans had problems with Arabs, period. On Fridays they’d grab a few random Arabs coming out of prayers and hang them, just to show who was boss. (They had to be nicer to Jews, who were often under the official protection of whatever European country they came from.) Hence the Arab Revolt.
A few years ago I read the entire 1001 Arabian Nights (in English translation). I don't know how much it typifies Muslim attitudes but I found it to be remarkably favorable towards Jews and remarkably negative towards Bedouin.
In the fall of 1995 my car had a held on encounter with a white tailed deer in a rural area of Connecticut. Very similar to what happened between that car and the csmel except that the deer bounced off the car windshield back onto the road. Deer are much smaller than camels. The State Police disparcher told me that my incidence was the fourth deer car impact THAT NIGHT.
We used to live in the mountains of Maine (NE corner of the White Mountain National Forest). Driving around in that area you see many signs saying "Break for moose; it could save your life". Moose are HUGE, like camels. They can weigh up to 1500 lb (not like the 300 or so pounds of a deer).
The camel grazing issues remind me of issues in the US surrounding cattle grazing on public land near water. Obviously in the US there are areas of public land where cattle grazing is allowed, with permits and rules, but generally the rule is that they have to be kept away from creek beds to prevent damaging the ecosystem there. Is that any different in Braverman's conception?
Similarly, connected to very little else, moose and elk are similarly tall and leggy to camels, and very dangerous to hit with a car. The rule always went that between a deer and a car, the car wins, but between a moose and a car, the moose wins
This is a woman clearly deeply sunk into her circle, writing in their jargon with no idea (or, more likely, no care) that to outsiders it's like a foreign language, full of assumptions that she doesn't think need to be proved. Here are a couple of examples just from this response:
"far removed from the violent schemes of the settler colonial project"
Just look at how many "proven" assumptions are packed into that one sentence: That "settler colonial projects" exist, that Israel- in the Negev!- is one of them, that they have "schemes" which are "violent," etc. etc.
"the local Bedouin communities and their more-than-human traditions"
What does that even *mean*? I mean, to be honest, it sounds a bit...*racist*, no? That Bedouin are somehow better than Jews or something?
"The Jewish past most certainly includes domesticated camels - they are mentioned in the Bible!"
I'll do you one better: The Bible is full of references to Arabs and Bedouin. (Obviously more like "Semites who travelled around the desert," but Arabs sometimes even by that name.) Every Jewish schoolchild knows that Rashi says that when Avraham saw the three angels, he assumed they were Arabs wandering in the desert.
That leads us to another point that this great scholar seems not to realize: Any conflict between Bedouin and Israelis is far, far more easily explained as an aspect of a conflict that has been going on all around Planet Earth for about as long as there have been human beings: settled people vs. nomads. Even Tanach talks about this. There is an idea that the story of Kayin and Hevel itself is a metaphor for this conflict, Kayin being the settled farmer and Hevel being the nomadic shepherd. The references in the Yosef story to the Egyptians not liking shepherds is probably a reference to this. And of course this goes on to this day vis a vis Gypsies and related groups. Some even say the old "town vs. gown" conflict is an aspect of this.
Point being, these things will happen whenever civilization meets those who don't want to fit into civilization, and boy do the Bedouin not want to be part of civilization. It is nice when accommodations can be reached to let the "wild men" be themselves- we all have a little justified romance of such things, and maybe even some species memory of it- but at certain points the line has to be drawn. Just because one is a Bedouin doesn't mean he gets to steal a car, for example. (I choose that example deliberately.) And, yeah, a little control of your camels would be good. Most of us don't even get to *own* a camel.
I wrote in a comment on another post that the attitude towards Bedouin in *1001 Arabian Nights* is entirely negative. They are presented as almost sub-human.
The British and the Ottomans had trouble with the Bedouin and tried to suppress their ways. I think that the Mamluks did as well. Maybe the problem is the one thing in common -- the Bedouin themselves.
There was another set of nomads who had an impact in Eretz Yisrael. The Mongols paid a visit in 1260 CE. I don't know how much damage they caused. Two years earlier they had totally destroyed Mesopotamia and that area has yet to recover; they had also sacked Damascus and Sidon. Eretz Yisrael had been ravaged by almost two centuries of nonstop war among Seljuks, Fatimids, Crusaders, Ayyubids, and Khwarazmians so it isn't clear there was much left to ravage. :( But in any case, the Battle of Ain Jalut was a victory for the Mamluks against the Mongols and it was the first Mongol defeat that was never reversed. Interestingly, evidence discovered a just decades ago indicated that much of the Mongol Army had been withdrawn northward before the battle because of a lack of fodder for their animals in the summer!
Jerusalem is still dotted with Mamluk guard posts. (They were there to guard farms that were distant from the walls and important routes.) We pass some of them, marked by the Antiquities Authority, on our walks.
The Ottomans had problems with Arabs, period. On Fridays they’d grab a few random Arabs coming out of prayers and hang them, just to show who was boss. (They had to be nicer to Jews, who were often under the official protection of whatever European country they came from.) Hence the Arab Revolt.
Yup, just came across it elsewhere. It's a Thing now, I guess.
Oh lord.
And "chest feeders" is a lot more bizarre than that.
A few years ago I read the entire 1001 Arabian Nights (in English translation). I don't know how much it typifies Muslim attitudes but I found it to be remarkably favorable towards Jews and remarkably negative towards Bedouin.
The main characters of the 1001 Nights are Persian, and the stories come from a wide range of sources, including non-Arab ones (India etc.).
But of course, there's no conflict like an *intra*-religious conflict.
I suppose quoting to Braverman the avot nezikin of “shein” and “regel” would make little impact… (unlike a camel on your windshield)
In the fall of 1995 my car had a held on encounter with a white tailed deer in a rural area of Connecticut. Very similar to what happened between that car and the csmel except that the deer bounced off the car windshield back onto the road. Deer are much smaller than camels. The State Police disparcher told me that my incidence was the fourth deer car impact THAT NIGHT.
We used to live in the mountains of Maine (NE corner of the White Mountain National Forest). Driving around in that area you see many signs saying "Break for moose; it could save your life". Moose are HUGE, like camels. They can weigh up to 1500 lb (not like the 300 or so pounds of a deer).
Happy memorial day. We should remember those who served... all of them.
I like your anti anti posts more than your anti anti anti posts.