Israel, Mishegas

Facebook draws borders

There’s been ruckus over a facebook decision recently to label the settlements over the green line as being in “Palestine.”
The J Post:

Ma’aleh Adumim resident Julian Czarny woke up recently to discover that he lived in “Palestine” – at least according to the popular Internet social networking site Facebook.
Facebook no longer allows members from Ma’aleh Adumim, Ariel, Betar Illit and other settlements over the Green Line to list their hometowns as situated in Israel, but instead provides only a preset location, with their country listed as “Palestine.”
“Someone at Facebook is simply prejudging whatever may or may not come about in future negotiations,” said Czarny. “Who exactly decided on this computerized transfer of over a quarter-million Jews from Israel to Palestine?”

Whether or not I agree with the decision, I find it fascinating the way folks’ on-line lives intersect with off-line world.
Also, here’s the facebook group.
Full story.

29 thoughts on “Facebook draws borders

  1. There is a choice for “Maaleh Adumim, Palestine” and a choice for “Maaleh Adumim, Israel”. Just change it and you’re all fixed.

  2. Interesting. “Israel” isn’t accurate (since Israel has not annexed Ma’aleh Adumim, at least de jure), but “Palestine” isn’t accurate either (since there is no independent state of Palestine, and Ma’aleh Adumim isn’t under the control of the Palestinian Authority) unless we’re talking about the British Mandate of Palestine (which we generally aren’t). I think the most neutral term would be “West Bank” (not an independent state, but at least a well-defined geographical entity).

  3. “Someone at Facebook is simply prejudging whatever may or may not come about in future negotiations,” said Czarny.
    Surprisingly, I basically agree with this. Whether or not Ma’aleh Adumim should be part of a future Palestinian state, it isn’t yet.
    “Who exactly decided on this computerized transfer of over a quarter-million Jews from Israel to Palestine?”
    The answer to this, on the other hand, is clear. Palestine or no Palestine, it was the Ma’aleh Adumim residents themselves who decided to move out of the State of Israel (albeit with the assistance of government incentives).
    But because it has to do with Jews returning to their homeland and expressing their Jewish identity, Facebook feels they can limit freely without any qualms.
    Can other Jews express their Jewish identity by putting in “Cleveland, Israel” or “London, Israel”?
    Actually, I’m not sure why not. It’s just a Facebook profile, not a legal document. While we’re at it, “Vancouver, USA”! Fifty-four forty or fight!
    As for the commenters on the JPost article calling Facebook an “anti-Semitic hate site” and such, put up or shut up. Go ahead and annex the West Bank, I dare you. Yeah, I thought so. You don’t look so tough anymore.

  4. Its characteristic of settlers to imagine they live in Israel, and then get all bleary eyed when they find out they actually don’t.
    Well, they only imagine they live in Israel when its worth it for them. If, say, the government finds ways of giving them huge benefits and/or they come up with legal loopholes to discriminate against their neighbors using martial law then Israel moves to the other side of the fence again.
    And just to make the point – I’m all for “Maale Adumim, Palestine”. So what if its not accurate?

  5. Just checked: settlements in the Golan are listed as “Syria”. Annexed and claimed by Israel – but also internationally recognized as the sovereign territory of a real country (i.e. not Palestine).

  6. BTW – just for comparison, according to Yahoo weather, it’s Ariel, Israel.
    http://weather.yahoo.com/forecast/ISXX0029.html
    “And just to make the point – I’m all for “Maale Adumim, Palestine”. So what if its not accurate?”
    Because it’s inaccurate? We can also call it Jaffa, Palestine. But that would be wrong.
    I agree that the most accurate would probably be “Maale Adumim, West Bank” which is how most print media like the NY Times does it. But I think settlements, at this point since they fall under Israel control and sovreignty, and the residents consider themselves Israeli, culturally it’s more accurate to say “Maale Adumim, Israel” just as culturally it would be more accurate – probably – to say “Umm el Faham, Palestine”.

  7. But I think settlements, at this point since they fall under Israel control and sovreignty, and the residents consider themselves Israeli, culturally it’s more accurate to say “Maale Adumim, Israel” just as culturally it would be more accurate – probably – to say “Umm el Faham, Palestine”.
    1. THe residents of UelF do not think they live in Palestine. They are Palestinians living in Israel, just like there are french people living in Belgium.
    2. The residents of Maale Adumim might say they live in Israel, but they know full well they don’t: had they been living in Israel they would have been paying higher taxes, and the government wouldn’t subsidize their mortgages.

  8. I meant it as culturally – whom do UEF residents consider themselves more – Israelis, or Palestinians?
    That’s why I made the comparison…the same way the UEF residents see themselves as culturally Palestinian, even though there is a good chance they live in a area that will fall outside of Palestine, so too, the residents of Maale Adumim see themselves as Israeli Jews – even though there is an equally good chance they live in area that will fall outside of Israel in the future.
    And your second point kind of proves the opposite, no? Sure they can tax breaks, but who do they pay taxes to?

  9. but who do they pay taxes to?
    To the ISraeli military, the sovereign power in the west bank, who through its military legislation made the Israelis in the west bank subject to Israeli civilian Law. Doesn’t make it Israel – just like US citizens in held territories (e.g. Guam) don’t live in the US.

  10. “THe residents of UelF do not think they live in Palestine. They are Palestinians living in Israel, just like there are french people living in Belgium.”
    Really? We must know different Palestinians in UelF. Where are you getting this information? Next you are going to tell me that the Palestinians in Jerusalem don’t think they are living in Palestine, but in Israeli Jerusalem.
    But let’s make it official and move the border, so that UelF, Palestine will become part of Palestine, along with the Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem. That seems like a pretty fair trade if we are to leave Maale Adumin, and all of the other settlements.
    Is a state for the Jews called Israel not a fair trade for a state for the Arabs called Palestine?

  11. Oy.
    Well, maybe Olmert, Abbas, and Condi just need to consider the Facebook proposal for a two-state solution?

  12. Next you are going to tell me that the Palestinians in Jerusalem don’t think they are living in Palestine, but in Israeli Jerusalem.
    That would be correct. Look at their ID cards, their water bills and their orange passports.

  13. So, under your reasoning, Israel should maintain sovereignty forever over East Jerusalem? Fair enough.

  14. “THe residents of UelF do not think they live in Palestine. They are Palestinians living in Israel, just like there are french people living in Belgium.”
    In regards to Palestinians who live in Jerusalem…per Amit,
    “That would be correct. Look at their ID cards, their water bills and their orange passports…” which are Israeli.
    So, would this not imply that Palestinians who live in Jerusalem are living in Israel, like French people in Belgium, like Palestinians in UelF?
    Why, then, would Israel need to withdrawal from East Jerusalem?

  15. So, BZ, put up or shut up. Go ahead and admit that the Little Triangle needs to become part of Palestine, like East Jerusalem–or they should both stay part Israel. I dare you. Yeah, I thought so. You don’t look so tough anymore.

  16. That’s a non sequitur. I (unlike Jason) never claimed that residents of the Little Triangle are living in Palestine.

  17. Do the residents of Jerusalem live in Israel? If the Little Triangle and East Jerusalem are both Israel, what is the difference?

  18. The difference is, of course, between what is Israel now and what should be Israel as part of a future agreement. And you keep bringing up the latter, but I haven’t made any claims in this thread about what I think should be part of Israel in the future, nor have I claimed that everything that is part of Israel now should be part of Israel in the future.
    And I agree with the statement in the article that Facebook shouldn’t be invited to the final status talks. My statement that Ma’aleh Adumim is not Israel is intended as descriptive, not prescriptive.
    You’re trying to get me to say that I think there is a difference between how things are and how things should be, so that you can point to that as an example of hypocrisy. But that’s not hypocrisy, it’s just admitting that we live in an imperfect world.
    Hypocrisy is saying that Ma’aleh Adumim is in Israel (not should be, *is*) (and that anyone who disagrees is a Nazi Jew-hater – go read the comments on the JPost article if you have the stomach for it), while refusing to accept the real-world consequences that would accrue if it were *actually* in Israel.

  19. “The difference is, of course, between what is Israel now and what should be Israel as part of a future agreement. And you keep bringing up the latter, but I haven’t made any claims in this thread about what I think should be part of Israel in the future, nor have I claimed that everything that is part of Israel now should be part of Israel in the future.”
    You haven’t made any claims, but I am making the claim that Israel in the future should not include the Little Triangle or East Jerusalem–I think it is important that people who read this blog and see themselves as progressives consider this proposal.
    “And I agree with the statement in the article that Facebook shouldn’t be invited to the final status talks. My statement that Ma’aleh Adumim is not Israel is intended as descriptive, not prescriptive.”
    I’ll make a presciptive statement that Ma’aleh Adumin does not need to be part or Israel, and its residents might need to leave, but only if East Jerusalem and the Little Triangle do not remain parts of Israel–and those residents wouldn’t have to move an inch.
    “You’re trying to get me to say that I think there is a difference between how things are and how things should be, so that you can point to that as an example of hypocrisy. But that’s not hypocrisy, it’s just admitting that we live in an imperfect world.”
    I’m not sure why it is hypocritical to say that Israel should relinquish the Little Triangle, as it should relinquish East Jerusalem. Why can’t we try to correct an imperfection?
    “Hypocrisy is saying that Ma’aleh Adumim is in Israel (not should be, *is*) (and that anyone who disagrees is a Nazi Jew-hater – go read the comments on the JPost article if you have the stomach for it), while refusing to accept the real-world consequences that would accrue if it were *actually* in Israel.”
    I hope you are not implying that I have said/implied this. Of course anybody who writes such things makes no sence and should be ashamed of themselves.

  20. The difference between the little triangle and East Jerusalem is the vote. Residents of the little triangle are citizens and can vote, whereas residents of East Jerusalem are not citizens (thus the orange passports).
    Also, nobody thinks the green line should be revised, and Jerusalem seems to firmly straddle the line whereas the little triangle does not.

  21. “I (unlike Jason) never claimed that residents of the Little Triangle are living in Palestine.”
    No I didn’t claim that. I said that the resident of the triangle consider themselves Palestinians, culturally, even though factually they are not living in Palestine, but perhaps someday will be. I was making that comparison to Ma’ale Adumim, where the residents consider themselves as Israeli Jews, even though they are currently under a different status to some extent, and, may one day fall under the exact same cateogry as all Israeli Jews.
    Amit, so the taxes are payed to the Israeli military – which in it of itself is a joke because tax money also goes towards health insurance, education, infrastructure, and numerous other causes, not just defense, but I digress -yet they have teudot zehut the same as the ones in which i have living in ramat gan, they have the same passports, they have the same voting rights, and they – for the most part – have to follow the same laws.

  22. Jason writes:
    yet they have teudot zehut the same as the ones in which i have living in ramat gan, they have the same passports, they have the same voting rights
    Nu? So do Israeli citizens living in Miami.

  23. Jonthan writes:
    You haven’t made any claims, but I am making the claim that Israel in the future should not include the Little Triangle or East Jerusalem–I think it is important that people who read this blog and see themselves as progressives consider this proposal.
    I don’t think this should be off the table. I think it’s worth considering as long as all parties to the final-status negotiations agree to it, and as long as the residents, who are Israeli citizens, (keep those commas in the case of the Triangle; strike the commas in the case of East Jerusalem) consent to being placed outside of Israel and have the opportunity to pursue Palestinian citizenship. (I mean, I assume that’s the plan, rather than resettling them elsewhere in Israel like the Gush Katif evacuees – there wouldn’t be much point to that.)

  24. They do not follow the same laws. They follow the laws imposed by the military – which may or may not be the corresponding ISraeli laws.

  25. Amit–full citizenship (versus permanent residency) is a difference, but Palestinians in Jerusalem do have the right to obtain citizenship, as 12,000 have done. Bear in mind, too, that in 2000 the Mufti of Jerusalem made a decree to stop applying for citizenship because there was a rush of applications after the Camp David talks.
    It shouldn’t take too much imagination to redraw the border to include the Little Triangle. It will be no less complicated to separate Arab Jerusalem from the rest of the city.
    Why do you say nobody mentions including the Little Triange as part of Palestine?
    Sopher (the demographer) mentions it all of the time. As does Uzi Arad. Barak, Bibi, and Sharon all intimated it on various occasions. Lieberman speaks of it most often and explicitly, but people dismiss him as some type of racist (although I don’t see how the monikor applies here.)
    In any case, the 22% of historic Palestine–that we hear so much about from the left–would be agmented by including the Little Triange.

  26. BZ–
    Thank you for considering the Little Triangle idea.
    You bring up a legitimate legal (if not moral) probably that the residents of the Little Triangle will likely not want to relinquish Israeli citizenship. Something will have to be worked out, as any agreement with the Palestinians will require such a border change, in my ignorant opinion.
    There’s no point in making an agreement which will leave us in a demographic battle in another generation. As ugly as it may sound, that is the reality, and that is what speaks to a critical mass of Israeli voters, including this one.
    Ok, I’ve written way to much.

  27. Off-topic, but the FB group links to a not-the-least-credible anti-Obama group. So you can see where these guys are coming from.
    When it comes to networking sites like these, hometowns are largely a matter of self-identification, anyway. An Arab resident of West Jerusalem is free to post his or her country as “Palestine” just by joining the network.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.