Respectfully if you being German isn’t a nationality then you’ve never talked to any Germans. They developed the whole concept of nationalism.
You do realize that Germans existed long before “Germany” came into existence in 1871 aren’t you?
Do you?
Kobal2 does. The “real French” he describes are ethnically French. And the immigrants are not. And how exactly can you reconcile “German isn’t an ethnicity” with German “right of return” laws?
Really, so long as the husband is married why couldn’t they get married in Beirut? Do you some evidence that the government of Lebanon refuses to recognize marriages performed by Shayks?
clairobscur’s cite is section 4B of the 1970 amendment to the Law of Return, which reads, in full,
It may not be enforced, but on the books it appears that the law does not allow for the emigration of people who are ethnically Jewish or would have been considered Jewish under the Nuremberg Laws, if those individuals are not also religiously Jewish as well, nor does it allow for the registration of people who are ethnically Jewish or would have been considered Jewish under the Nuremberg Laws as Jewish, if those individuals are not also religiously Jewish as well.
Correction: it seems to allow for the emigration of people who are ethnically Jewish or would have been considered Jewish under the Nuremberg Laws, if those individuals are not also religiously Jewish as well, as long as they weren’t ever religious Jewish at any point themselves and then converted away from Judaism. That is, it looks as if you were born the Catholic daughter of a Jewish grandfather, you can immigrate as an oleh (but you won’t be registered as Jewish). If you were born the Jewish daughter of a Jewish grandfather, and became Catholic, you cannot emigrate under the Law of Return.
That would explain why there are those Christian Russian immigrants in Israel, but they wouldn’t be registered as Jewish on their ID cards, since they’re members of another religion and so don’t meet the definition of Jew under the amended Population Registry Law.
I don’t agree. French is an ethnicity as well as a nationality. My mother’s family is from France, and I still have family in France. Even if they become citizens of another country, they still consider themselves French.
The difference you are thinking of is the fact that in Israel, “Jewish” is designated as a nationality/ethnicity in the official population registry (and until recently was on ID cards), something other countries do not do (although the Soviet Union did, so maybe Terr is more acclimated to it than most).
Yes.
But I still have a problem with the idea that Israeli can’t also be a nationality. If my family can be French Jews, why can’t there be Israeli Jews as well. And yes, I know there are in a sense, but it is still missing a layer of identity by not allowing for someone’s “Israeliness”, in addition to being Jewish. There are Israeli Jews who have no cultural ties to their roots from other countries, much like Americans, and there is a particular Israeli culture not common with diaspora Jews, so why can’t that be formally acknowledged?
No, as I noted in my post #322
As long as you had one “Jewish grandparent”, you claim to be a Jew, and you never converted from Judaism to another religion, as far as Israel is concerned you’re entitled to immigration to Israel, Israeli citizenship and AFAIK have “Nationality: Jew” stamped on your ID.
Or I should say “used to” regarding the national ID since Israel still prints "Nationality: " since they no longer print the nationality since the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that converts to Reform Judaism were to be considered Jews and the religious parties had a hissy fit and demanded that part of the ID no longer be shown because they hated the idea of seeing Reform Jews having IDs that said Jew.
Edit: whoops saw later post.
There’s an interview atm in Haaretz with John Waters, possibly the most civilised person walking the planet (personal opinion) in which he responds to the mob calling him, at best, anti-Israeli.
His response is he’s just anti-Apartheid. As it was in the 70s and 80s elsewhere, that’ll do for me as well.
Ask a Bavarian if he’s “ethnically German.”
Be prepared to be smacked with a stein.
German is a linguistically defined “race” or “nation.” Pomeranian, Swabian, Swiss, Austrian, Tyrolean, and Saxon are ethnicities. Note that three of those territories and their associated ethnicities are not in the Federal Republic of Germany.
So, yes, if you speak German, you are German, all the way to Kazakhstan. But apparently this even applies to groups like Prussians whose ancestors spoke a non-German language.
(It gets wonky with Naziism, in that Hitler threw in all this nonsense about “Aryans” and “Semites.” But German is a language-group.)
There have been Israelis who wanted Israel to be “the land of those who speak Hebrew” instead of “Jews” by blood or rite. They have been shot down.
Note also that the French had radical nationalists before the Germans did, but France is the successor to a feudal kingdom, and the term “ethnic French” is…eh, imprecise.
Yeah, they get like that when they’re drunk.
Seriously, ask a Sicilian if he’s an Italian and you’ll get the same response. But when they’re both immigrants they become Italians in solidarity. That’s how tribalism works.
- “Me against my brother. Me and my brother against my cousin. Me and my cousin against a stranger”.*
Anyway, Terr, I understand what you mean by “ethnic French.” It just sounds strange to me.
It’s just…in France there are lots of ethnicities, whose relationship to the central Île-de-France culture varies. One of the French Dopers could explain it better, but I think it’s like this:
A Breton is a French citizen rather than a citizen of Wales or something, but historically Brittany had a distinct “ethnicity” based on language and regional culture. It’s like the difference between a Karelian and a Russian, maybe?
A Breton today probably mostly is culturally and ethnically “French”–but then, in the same way as a French Jew is culturally and ethnically “French.”
If a Breton and a Savoyard are equally “ethnic French,” why is not a French Jew or the son of Algerian immigrants?
So why does a French Jew gain Jewish nationality on migration to Israel? Why does a Russian Christian? They’re not ethnically the same to the anthropologist or the demographer. They’re nationally/ethnically/legally the same according to a certain political definition.
That definition has historical reasons, but it is a little arbitrary. And it can change.
The question is, should the land belong more to a Russian Christian immigrant with a few Jewish great-grandparents than to a descendant of Samaritans, whose tribe have lived there since before Nebuchadnezzar, and just changed their language and religion a couple of times?
I’m a bit puzzled by all the claims or at least strong suggestions that you can’t be of more than one nationality.
Of course “nationality” and “ethnicity” are modern concepts that have many different understandings.
Based on some people rationale, the Palestinians have been lying to the West for decades now by claiming to be a nationality since Palestinians also claim to be “Arabs” as well as “Palestinians”.
As to the question of whether or not “the Jews” are a nationality or not, I think Alessan put it best, “I’m sorry we don’t fit your definition of nationality, we came first.”
True which is why German-speaking Jews have always been considered Jews as have German speaking Poles. And of course in Germany it’s only a teeny tiny percentage of Germans who insist that German speaking Turks aren’t Germans.
Also, you’ll note how the Law of Return requires people have to speak German in order to qualify it.
For example, when the American Chris Kaman, who couldn’t speak enough German to order breakfast in a Berlin restaurant applied for German citizenship based on the Law of Return and cited his great-grandfather the Germans told him “fuck off, you don’t speak German you’re not German” who then turned to all the 3rd generation Turkish immigrants who only spoke German and said “We’re so sorry you’re not considered German citizens, don’t worry, you’re now all German citizens”.
Edit: The tone wasn’t meant to be insulting just tongue-in-cheek to show that the reality was different and I’m pretty sure you’ll recognize that.
The whole concept of “nationality” is a modern one, rather fluid and subject to a number of different understandings that make little sense.
For example Arabic-speaking Christians are, with rare exceptions considered Arabs whereas, with extremely rare exceptions, Arabic speaking Jews have never been considered or consider themselves to be Arabs.
In fact the major drivers behind Arab nationalism, which started in the 19th Century were Christians who were trying to build solidarity with Muslims.
Lebanese Christians generally view themselves as Arabs, but many, particularly outside of Lebanon insist they are not Arabs but “Phoenicians”.
For that matter, since you asked if the Druze are Arabs or not earlier, it depends on who you ask. The Druze of the Golan and Lebanon insist they are. The Druze of Israel insist they aren’t and use the term “Arab” as a pejorative.
Anyway “nationality” is just a modern, western way of trying to classify how people think of themselves. In the Middle East, until very recently people generally identified themselves by the religious group the came from, Muslim, Christian, Druze, Samaritan, Circassian, Shia, Sunni, and of course the Jews. And frankly it’s the religious ties that seem to matter most to this day when it comes to people picking their loyalty.
Yes, and even when they are personally atheist.
Do you think the increase in professed and/or militant atheism will change that?
Well, that certainly settles that!
The most ardently racist Israelis have been atheists and the Ayatollah Khomeini on his worst day was never as brutal as either Hafez Assad or Saddam Hussein.
I doubt it.
I agree.
So much for the new atheists’ claim that atheism will foster world peace.
How lucky then that you don’t live in an ethnic state.
Ethnicity is a mix of culture, language, customs, sometimes religion and physical attributes. So the answer to your question is: you can become “ethnic French” if you manage to fit in enough that the “ethnic French” consider you their own. And if you ask for precise requirements on how to do this, you will not get a precise answer.
But anyway, we’re not discussing why ethnic states exist and whether that’s a positive or a negative thing. At least I am not. All I am saying, again, is that if you’re ONLY against Israel being a Jewish state, but not France being a French state, Germany being a German state, Ireland being Irish… etc. etc., then you’re antisemitic.
And since it would be really hard for you to find someone (much less a crowd of such people) who is vehemently against Ireland being Irish, for example, then it is pretty clear that anyone who is against Israel being a Jewish state is antisemitic.
(Entire quoted text is sardonic in case you can’t tell)
OK, fine, you have a point. But Germans are historically a dialect continuum, and include several “tribes.”