On the Settlement Enterprise
Hello Rabbi Michael,
Do you think there is moral justification for going and establishing a settlement in a place surrounded by hostile Palestinian villages and then working with the sectoral parties (religious Zionism, which is only a small percentage of Israeli society) so that the state will officially recognize this settlement and be obligated to provide it with security and infrastructure?
I’m not talking about all the communities in Judea and Samaria, the vast majority of which have a national justification that they prevent a Palestinian terrorist organization like the one that exists in Gaza.
I’m talking about those who establish (usually on their own initiative) a settlement on some hill with the goal of settling the land or some vision of Israel’s redemption, and at the same time drag the state and the army into providing them with security, etc.
After all, it is very possible that there is a majority of the people, even a fairly large consensus, who do not agree with this approach, and yet that majority later goes and enlists in the army (not all of them for combat, but let’s put that aside). And if they were asked, they would not be willing to embark on this adventure and even think it is a really bad idea, let alone pay for it, and even more so would they not be willing to risk themselves or their own children for what they see as the madness of individuals.
So I’ll repeat my question: Isn’t there a kind of moral injustice in establishing a settlement in the middle of a hostile place and dragging in state and military infrastructure to support it, even though there is probably broad agreement against the idea and that same majority will also have to pay an economic price (and sometimes a bloody price) for this settlement? And does it matter if those individuals believe (against the majority) that there is actually a security justification for establishing that settlement and not just a religious value?
I hope I phrased the question well, I would appreciate your feedback.
It has nothing to do with whether the majority knows or not. If you think it’s essential for security or some other supreme value, then do it. The government shouldn’t approve it after the fact, and if it did, then that’s what the public decided.
I didn't understand how this has nothing to do with the majority's opinion? After all, the majority is dragged along by this minority and is actually paying some of the prices of this group of individuals.
And secondly, to say that if the government approved the decision of that handful then that's what the public decided is a bit naive in my opinion. If the public were asked, they would be opposed. The fact that the government approved something like that could be out of some game of interests (they would vote for it and they would support the advancement of such a law). It's like saying that the public decided (until before the war at least) that the Haredim shouldn't be drafted or that the public opposes core studies in Haredi institutions, and the evidence that the public decided so is that the government accepted the Haredi parties' policy on these issues, even though it is clearly not true.
And here it is not a question of simply distributing resources as if they had established another community center or community center that requires public funds, it is a decision that has a drastic impact indirectly and even directly, to the point that the majority of the people may end up (they or their children) in the reserves/regular service and take a line there and do the gendarmerie there - even though the majority does not agree with it.
First, indeed, if someone believes in something, the blame is not on him but on the one who allows him to. Even among the Haredim. One can make claims that he believes in it, but if this is indeed his belief then there is no question about it.
Secondly, the Haredim do not act in the interest of the general public but in the interest of their own sectoral and economic interests, at the expense of the public. The settlers believe that they are acting in the interest of the public.
Thanks for the response, a few things:
1. I have no blame for the settler for going and establishing an outpost, a free man to act according to the dictates of his conscience. But more for the fact that he knew that in doing so he was dragging the majority who were not interested in it and would pay a price for it – and yet he did it. And I see no point in blaming the government for allowing it, unfortunately especially at this time when there is really nothing to be expected from such a body. And therefore I am making accusations against those who knew how to exploit the government's weakness for this.
2. The term ‘acting for the benefit of the general public’ is so fluid that it is difficult for it to be an estimate of anything. The ultra-Orthodox will come and say that he is the one who acts in the best interest of the Jewish people by studying Torah and it is what protects and defends us, and the Torah is what protected the Jewish people during two thousand years of exile, as opposed to the secularist who threatens our yeshiva here by not observing Torah and commandments (and all sorts of other slogans that repeat themselves). So I don't see how agendas can be the justification for anything. In any case, if the settler claimed that he was establishing the outpost not out of the commandment of settling the land and belief in a complete Land of Israel but out of a pure security need, even then it would be difficult to justify an extremist opinion and drag a complete state after it. But usually that is not the case, they act as I said for principles such as a "complete Land of Israel" and the redemption of the land (with very impressive dedication). There is also an aspect of security need there sometimes, but it is not at the top of the priority list.
I don't know if the discussion has exhausted itself, in any case, this is my opinion.
Indeed, Mitza. In my opinion, the difference is obvious, but everything has already been written.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
