It’s too late now, but back in 1948, it would have been a good idea. Instead of dumping the world’s Jews in a little scrap of land next to a lot of Muslims who had recently lived there, the wise leaders of the victors of WW Two should have given them Montana. Montana, at that time had, what, 2000 people living there? The whole place could have been bought from the Montanans for a paltry sum, compared to all the expense and woe of maintaining “peace” in Israel.
If we’re giving away Montana, it would be an obscenity to give it to anyone but the Native Americans from whom it was originally stolen, and I’m sure there that there would be blood spilled if that happened
Sure - would make sense for rational people. But not for folk who believe they have some divine right to a specific piece of real estate.
Who knows - if we had given them Montana, or one of the Dakotas, maybe they woulda been content enough. They might have wanted to hold out for something with sea access, so they mighta preferred a chunk of California, Texas, Georgia, or Maine…
People considered Alaska.
There is a SF novel that takes place in that alternate timeline
In terms of “what ifs”, I’ve long thought it woulda been less objectionable if, as the US expanded, each state was required to identify a contiguous 1/10 of its area which was given to the various Native Americans into perpetuity.
So would the plan be to uproot the half million Jews already living in Palestine in 1945 and ship them off to Billings?
Then we would have had a few more Trail of Tears - one for each new state. You think the native peoples would have been given prime property in each state, or allowed to stay put where they were?
I thought Israel was the destined place for the Jews of Europe due to historical claims of the land and significant religious sites, as well as an exiting population. I agree settling people in a less-contested land would have been better for all involved over the long term, but TPTB at the time likely wanted expediency of solution.
How about today? The people of Gaza are suffering and their civilization is in tatters - is anyone proposing now to resettle the Palestinians from Gaza to anywhere else? Would Montana or Alaska welcome them?
The problem with this is, what Jews would agree to it?
Israel wasn’t chosen randomly, it had historical significance. It is also an extremely valuable piece of land, just in terms of its sheer geography and location, even if we took religion out of the equation. Why would Jews agree to go to Montana?
The Levant region = the crossroads of the Middle East, Africa, Arabia and Europe, and within (relatively) short distance travel to those places. Access to both the Red Sea and Mediterranean. Montana = no ocean access, isolated, cut off, access to only USA and Canada.
Also, in addition to the Jews whose ancestors never left that region, a ton of European Jews had already settled there, running away from Russian pogroms and whatnot. The 1948 proclamation was not really about “dumping Jews” there, it was about giving sovereignty to the Jews already there.
Why Montana? Why not ship them off to Madagascar? Hmm, wait, I think someone already thought of that…
Never mind.
Coincidentally (or maybe not) Montana is in the same latitude as the Russian Jewish Autonomous Oblast. If these darn displaced peoples would just settle for the places almost everyone else refuses to live…
As Lenny Bruce observed:
If you live in Butte, Montana, you’re going to be goyish even if you’re Jewish.
Do I remember correctly that Uganda was also considered?
This talk of a more powerful nation or political movement unilaterally electing to ‘relocate’ or ‘evacuate’ an ethnic group as a ‘solution’ to strife regardless of their own volition has a familiar ring to it.
Stranger
Not that anyone would have aske my opinion in the 40s…
But I think they should have carved off a big chunk (30%? More?) of Germany and made that New Israel. I mean, take that and suck it, Nazis. You took away our homes, our very lives? Right back at ya! Move along to the Russian Sektor.
There’s no possible way that could have gone bad. Idi Amin was such an understanding guy. And cannibal (alleged)
In early August 1972, the President of Uganda Idi Amin ordered the expulsion of his country’s Indian minority, giving them 90 days to leave the country.
I’m not saying it would have been all milk and honey. After all, the US had a lot of folks back in '48 who didn’t like Jews. Despite the Holocaust, it had been a tough sell to get involved in Europe’s war.
Besides what other people have already said, do you really think the United States would have allowed Montana to secede from the Union?
Do you understand the part where the location really mattered to them?
Alessan, I have to admit, that’s a sticking point I hadn’t thought of.