Map Enthusiasts

I see your point. But I believe there would have been a good chance of it turning out like the U.S. when they finally did away with slavery. (Yes, I know different forms of slavery were drafted and implemented before it was outlawed. However, the sure count of people that were in slavery of any kind in the U.S., greatly decreased the decade following. It's still morally wrong. But that's a reality the U.S. and other countries lived and breathed back then.) I would worry that some form of Jim Crow laws would come about, after more Jewish people returned. (This does have me interested in learning more about how the Jewish people were treated over a decade, after the Nazi party fell in Germany. If anyone can point me in the right 'direction,' it would be much appreciated.) I'm not a historian, nor Israel expert. But I am a person wanting to learn more about the world's accurate history.

That would’ve set Germany back to 1933 basically. The fastest way to get their right wing to overtake the entire spectrum again, despite what just happened.

It was considered by some, I believe. This author wanted to avoid displacing anyone, though. Of course, many in Germany at that time were guilty in some way, so it would have been justifiable. But it would have always been a cause for tension, which, no matter how justified or morally right it would have been, in practice would lead to tensions similar to those in Israel/Palestine today.

The Zionists accepted the Peel Partition Plan of 1937 and the UN partition plan of 1947. The Palestinian Arabs refused it.

The Zionists declared a Jewish state in 1948. The Palestinian Arabs did not declare a state of their own.

The West Bank was occupied and then annexed by the Kingdom of Jordan and it gave citizenship to all Palestinians living there. Gaza was occupied by Egypt, but not annexed.

Israel offered a state to the Palestinians several times in Camp David, Olmert 2008, Taba, etc. The Palestinian leadership refused those offers without a specific counter offer.

The Palestinians had several opportunities to get a state, but chose otherwise.

Idk, Zionism is already kinda defeatist and antisemetic to begin with in its foundation. And later parts sound much more like it was written by a jewish person, such as "Dignity instead of sympathy." I say this because zionism is rooted in the belief jewish people can never and will never be accepted anywhere, and that they need their own nation to have somewhere safe. So with that in mind, I could see how this was written by a jewish zionist. Not that it isnt possible it wasnt, just that I feel there is reason to believe it was.

Which I can understand why this belief came into being, but I definitely dont agree with it. Nationalism and religious intolerance is why antisematism exists, so to me making a religious nation-state is like fighting fire with fire. You're not seeking equality, freedom, or acceptance, you're seeking somewhere where you're on top. Should be seeking a situation where no one is on top.

Edit: I tried searching the author, Joseph Hefter, to see if he was jewish but I cant find anything on him.

Keep in mind that Zionists claimed Palestine was "uninhabited" as well.

"A land without a people for a people without a land".

Because of antisemitism. The USA had strict quotas for Jewish immigration. There were ships full of Jewish refugees, that were refused entry and had to turn around. Many of those on the shops died later in the Holocaust.

The British also had put restrictions on Jewish immigration to the mandate of Palestine during the 1940s. Ships filled with Jewish refugees were forced to Cyprus where they were kept prisoner in camps.

During Israel’s war of independence in 1948, the USA had an arms embargo against it.

I found this write up.

https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/ten-jewish-homelands-outside-palestine/

It’s a fringe group.

Might bump into some old acquaintances

North America has a very bad history with concentrating groups to certain regions

Most countries at the time didn’t want Jewish immigration or restricted it heavily. The USA sent ships full of Jewish refugees back to Europe during the Holocaust.

It looks like they were trying to avoid areas with significant existing/indigenous populations. The proposed size of roughly 50,000 square miles is slightly larger than Iceland is, and there would be a sizeable displaced or second-class local population, which it seems like this author was trying to avoid.

That's the catch right? Is there even a correct way to resettle a population? Ethnostates on some level with probably always just be broken.

But I'm glad op shared this. This seems to be a part of the Isreal discussion that gets walked past