Recent orders
Advocacy Against Racial Discrimination
Advocacy Against Racial Discrimination
Author
Institution
Introduction
Every country has varied aspects of its past and present that it wishes it could bury in a bottomless pit. For some countries, such elements may include economic deprivation, bad governance, insecurity or even civil wars. It goes without saying that these aspects or events have a bearing on the pillars or foundations of the country, in which case they have the capacity to cause degeneration in the country. This underlines or explains why countries are always striving to eliminate such negative aspects. As much as the United States has several things that it is not proud of, I doubt that there is anything that racism or racial discrimination as far as being shameful is concerned. Racial discrimination has been one of the key dark spots in the fabric of the United States. Unfortunately, it has always been deeply rooted or founded in the history of the United States, continues to be expressed in the current days. In fact, it threatens to continue eating into the United States’ fabric if comprehensive measures are not taken to eliminate it once and for all.
While there exists varied definitions of racial discrimination or racism, it may simply be defined as a set of actions or beliefs that view an individual or a group of people as inferior to others. These beliefs are fundamentally based on the physical appearance of the individual especially the complexion or color of his or her skin (Ezell, 2001). Almost every person has come across racial discrimination in the United States, either as a perpetrator, victim or an indifferent witness. For quite a long time, there has existed a common misconception that racial discrimination involves whites to blacks only, with blacks as victims and whites as perpetrators. This has emanated from the fact that racial discrimination has, in the past, been perpetrated by individuals of European descent against varied other groups such as Latinos and African Americans. It is worth noting, however, that racial discrimination also entails the tension that exists between varied other groups of people. For example, there has been a long-standing friction between Asian-American populations and African Americans in varied parts of the United States. The increasing globalization, mobility and diversity experienced in the United States and the entire world demands that comprehensive measures are taken to safeguard the position of the United States, both in the present and future (Ezell, 2001).
Racial discrimination cuts across almost every aspect of the United States’ fabric. It is worth noting that, irrespective of the culture that an individual comes from, the effects of racism can be seen even in cases where an individual has never directly felt the vice directed to him or her. The expansiveness of the effects underline the fact that the vice crosscuts almost every area of the society including schools, workplaces, prisons, correctional facilities, as well as the varied law enforcement agencies (Strolovitch, 2007).
As much as many people may not acknowledge the magnitude of the problem, the effects of racial discrimination cannot be ignored. Unfortunately, every person pays the price for allowing the vice to grow or continue being perpetuated in America. This is especially considering the devastating effects of racial discrimination (Strolovitch, 2007).
First, research has shown that stereotyping and racial discrimination can result to severe mental health effects, as well as emotional trauma. It is worth noting that these effects trigger other damages such as loss of promotional opportunities, jobs, pay, as well as damaged reputations. Unfortunately, the entire public has everything to lose for condoning this vice. This is in terms of decreased production, especially in public institutions, as there exists chances that discrimination led to the elimination of individuals who may have been more experienced or suited for certain jobs than the current ones (Strolovitch, 2007). Scholars opine that racial discrimination may be carried out structurally or individually with consequences being equally adverse. It is worth noting that, in cases where the vice is carried out or perpetuated institutionally or structurally, it has the capacity to diminish a country or institution’s collective capacity to enhance the progress or advancement of the members.
In addition, racial discrimination and other types of stereotypes have for quite a long time been blamed for violence that is experienced in varied parts of the globe. Researchers have, more often than not, opined that individuals who perpetuate stereotypes or racial discrimination select scapegoats on whom they take out their aggression and frustrations. In most cases, they select scapegoats or individuals who may be seen as inferior as or even weaker than them. This explains the numerous wars that have experienced in varied parts of the world, especially pitting different communities or races (Saha, 1999). Scholars opine that such stereotypes create a misconception that certain groups of people are getting or are entitled to more than what they should get. In this case, when they do not get their perceived level of entitlement, they more often than not resort to unmitigated frustration and aggression pointed towards the inferior or weaker communities. This is because they believe that the inferior groups are responsible for their predicament and the “denial” of their entitlement (Saha, 1999).
Moreover, ethnic or racial discrimination and stereotyping has the capacity to influence the wellbeing or health of the ethnic minorities via its association with variations in physiologic and mental states, as well as via its influence on an individual’s participation in risky behaviors including substance abuse and alcohol consumption. Numerous studies have attempted to examine the effect than racial discrimination has on mental health. Most of these studies have shown that racial or ethnic discrimination may be a considerable source of stress for ethnic or racial minority populations. In addition, it is associated with decreased sense of wellbeing including life satisfaction, happiness and self esteem, as well as increased hopelessness, psychosis, anger, substance abuse and anxiety (Saha, 1999). Perceived discrimination has been shown to have a bearing on depression. Varied studies have tried to examine the impact or relationship between physiologic changes and self-reported experiences with ethnic or racial bias. These have shown that there exists some relationship between discrimination-related stress and increased blood pressure. As much as other studies have shown that the levels and magnitude of the effects are dependent on an individual’s coping style, there is consensus that it has negative effects on an individual’s psychology (Saha, 1999). These have been complemented by other studies have shown a connection or relationship between discrimination and a high prevalence of constant or chronic diseases caused by behavioral risks such as alcohol consumption, substance abuse and cigarette smoking. It goes without saying that risk factors including substance abuse and alcoholism have a bearing on the economic soundness of every country. This is especially due to its bearing on the productivity of individuals.
The magnitude of the adverse effects that racial discrimination has on an individual, as well as the entire community underlines the importance of enhancing advocacy efforts against the vice (Harries-Jones, 1991). As much as many people assume that the government is the only key player in these efforts it is worth noting that, every person has a duty or role to play in eliminating it. This is especially having in mind that everyone is affected, whether directly or indirectly. Of course, the government and its varied agencies have a role to play, especially in crafting laws and regulations against the vice, as well as implementing them (Harries-Jones, 1991). However, creating awareness amongst all the parties involved is of utmost importance especially since it is the basic things that people do that make or establish a difference in the state of the nation. It is imperative that everyone recognizes the existence of racial discrimination, which underlines the importance of creating awareness (Saha, 1999). When individuals limit themselves to expressing compassion and mercy for victims of racial discrimination without making a commitment or taking a stand to eliminate it, they are essentially skirting the problem and even abetting it. Pretending that one is color-blind even when young Asians, black and native youngsters encounter despicable hardships, and professing not to perceive any variation in treatment, is tantamount to sidestepping the problem (Harries-Jones, 1991).
The first step towards advocacy is acknowledging the existence of the problem. It is imperative that individuals desist from looking for explanations so as to justify isolated cases of deviant behaviors such as racial discrimination (Saha, 1999).
Secondly, the awareness must involve determination of the degree of institutional and personal participation that contributes in reinforcing racial discrimination. It is imperative that individuals engage in a critical assessment of behavior, attitude, as well as institutional practices whether collective or individual (Saha, 1999).
Third, it is imperative that all people see and spell out racial discrimination in its true form (Scheurich, 2002). Many are times when individuals skirt around the issue of racial discrimination by using incorrect vocabulary, attempting to reduce it to a simple problem of being “socio-economically deprived” or even lowering it by placing the vice on the same footing or platform as discrimination that is based on religion, language (Scheurich, 2002).
Fourth, it is imperative that there exist a guarantee of active and sustained participation of individuals who have been victims of racial discrimination in crucial levels of decision making (Romero, 2005). In quite a number of instances, black, Asian, and Native communities complain that studies and consultations are carried out, seminars held, committees set up and even spokespersons named without direct or even indirect involvement on their part. This is even in cases when such actions would jeopardize their interests. Of course, this triggers the question as to how such policies would be a true representation of their needs without involving the victims (Romero, 2005).
Fifth, it is imperative that the advocates against racial discrimination must maintain their consistency (Roberts, & Ash, 2009). The adoption of antiracist policies underlines the implementation of a mechanism that includes guidelines, rules, human resources and financial materials, methods of continuous and progressive evaluation, committees, as well as strategies that recognize the existence of racial discrimination and which aim at eliminating it from the country’s fabric (Roberts, & Ash, 2009).
In enhancing racial awareness, advocacy groups must engage in clear strategies that challenge the existing laws, as well as the attitudes of the people.
First, the groups must identify and make alterations of retrogressive policies that abet this situation or that seem to promote it. In this case, it is imperative that an all-inclusive team of professionals is formed and incorporate community leaders (Miller, & Covey, 1999). Reformers, religious leaders and other community leaders play a crucial role in setting up the attitude and mind of the public, especially in cases where they treat all people equally. It is extremely crucial that issues pertaining to creed and caste are handled while incorporating a clear, as well as open conscience to ensure that everyone obtains justice and lives with respect (Miller, & Covey, 1999). It is imperative that the victims of racial discrimination are represented adequately in these formal and informal groups.
In addition, advocacy groups may organize community events that involve or appeal to all races. These activities would allow for the enhancement of relationships between the varied races (Sue, & Sue, 1999). Research has shown that racial discrimination is promoted by misunderstandings and ignorance about other cultures. In essence, such events would come in handy in eliminating the tension and stereotypes as people from different cultures and races learn about each other (Sue, & Sue, 1999).
Moreover, it is imperative that groups exploit instances or incidences where racial discrimination is seen. In such instances, these groups should use such instances not only to sensitize the community about the varied activities that amount to discrimination, but also to draw attention to discriminatory laws and policies (Hair, 2001). This would allow the group to garner support especially with the elimination of the ignorance of people from different races. In addition, it is imperative that the group calls up clean-up activities to eliminate graffiti that seem to promote racial intolerance or discrimination and stereotypes. Such activities would send a clear signal to the perpetrators whether individuals or institutions that such retrogressive actions will not be tolerated or condoned in the society (Hair, 2001).
In conclusion, racial discrimination has been one of the most shameful blots in the United States fabric. As much as it is assumed to be a thing of the past, research has shown that the vice is still thriving in varied places including schools, institutions and even workplaces. It goes without while most people think of discrimination as existing only between European whites and African Americans, the vice also exists between other races such as Spaniards, Asians and even Black Americans. It goes without saying that racial discrimination propels varied ills in the society. These include ills such as racially instigated violence, reduced productivity in the workplace, as well as loss of property. Advocacy against racial discrimination must involve the participation of the affected groups. It is imperative that the advocacy efforts incorporate involve community leaders, as well as religious leaders and other professionals. In addition, the advocacy group may involve holding roadshows and other events to cement the relationships between people of varied races. This will come in handy in eliminating the ignorance of people about other tribes. Moreover, it is imperative that the group comes up hard against instances of racial discrimination. Such actions would serve as appropriate platforms of sensitizing the people about the existence of the vice in the society, as well as calling for reexamination of policies that seem to abet the vice. This should be complemented using cleanup activities to eliminate graffiti that promote the vice.
References
Harries-Jones, P (1991). Making Knowledge Count: Advocacy and Social Science. New York: McGill-Queen’s Press
Scheurich, JJ (2002). Anti-Racist Scholarship: An Advocacy. New York: SUNY Press
Strolovitch, DZ (2007). Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Roberts, A & Ash, T G (2009). Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present. New York: The Urban Institute
Romero, V (2005). Alienated: Immigrant Rights, the Constitution, and Equality in America. New York: NYU Press
Saha, S C (1999). Dictionary of Human Rights Advocacy Organizations in Africa. London: Greenwood Publishing Group
Ezell, M. (2001). Advocacy in the human services. New York: Brooks/Cole Thomas Learning
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1999). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
Miller, V., & Covey, J. (1999). Advocacy Sourcebook: Frameworks for Planning, Action, and Reflection. Boston, Massachusetts: Institute for Development Research
Hair, P. (2001). Louder than words: Lawyers, communities and the struggle for justice. New York, NY: Rockefeller Foundation.
Extent Of Samaritan Jew Entrapment Between Israeli Jews And Palestine Arabs
Extent Of Samaritan Jew Entrapment Between Israeli Jews And Palestine Arabs
Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u Samaritan Jews: Their origins and identity before the current strife PAGEREF _Toc386114400 h 2The Samaritan relationship with Israel and Palestine. PAGEREF _Toc386114401 h 4Samaritan positions before the establishment of Israel, their views on Zionism and Palestine. PAGEREF _Toc386114402 h 7The Samaritan position during the Arab vs. Israeli Jewish wars. PAGEREF _Toc386114403 h 9Similarities between Samaritan Jews and Palestine Arabs. PAGEREF _Toc386114404 h 11Differences between Samaritans and Palestine Arabs. PAGEREF _Toc386114405 h 13Conclusion. PAGEREF _Toc386114406 h 14
Abstract
The Samaritan Jews are a relatively small group of ethnocentric people who until recently lived a life immune to the current dynamics of geopolitical turmoil. They are thought to have originated from the Israelite tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, but the current debate has little to do with ancestral origins. This paper explores their origin and struggle for acceptance and definition. On one side, the Jews in Israel claim Samaritan Jews have always been a part of their people – although slightly alienated for cultural purposes, while Palestine Arabs also lay claim to the same community especially in light of the current struggle for West Bank. In addition to these issues related to their identity crisis, we shall also try to delve into their religious affiliations, religious ties with Nablus and Holon as well as their position on Jewish and Arab religions. Finally, we shall explore Samaritan Jew wars with either side in relation to the mentioned regions, and eventually carry out a compare and contrast exercise between them, Israelite Jews, and Palestinian Arabs.
Key words: Samaritan Jew, Israelite Jew, Palestine Arabs, Zionism, Islam.
Introduction.
When the creators of Israel as a state envisaged their dream, they did not adequately factor in consideration for the roles of the minority Samaritan and Karaite ethnic groups that were on the sidelines. Although their existence had long been subject to the shifts in the geo-political environment of the region, they had not considered the tricky place people such as the Samaritans would find themselves by the establishment of Israel as a state. These minority groups found themselves in the centre of a heated battle between their Jewish cousins on the Israeli front and the Islamic counterparts on the other.
Stating that Samaritan Jews were in the center of this melee is not an overstatement for they actually were divided into two almost equal groups by their regions of residence on either side of the ideological, political, and religious divide. This paper explores some aspects of this tricky position that Samaritan Jews found themselves due to the creation of Israel and other factors.
Samaritan Jews: Their origins and identity before the current strifeSamaritan Jews claim that their ancestors were the two sons of Jacob, Manasseh and Ephraim. According to Anderson & Giles (2012), after Joshua conquered Canaan and settled the Israelites according to the will of Moses as instructed by God. Of the twelve tribes, excluding that of Levi, half were to be settled on Mount Gerizim, also known as the Mountain of Blessing (p. 56). The other half were to be settled on Mount Ebal, the Mountain of Curse. After the destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians in 722BC, a small number of the Israelites survived and were deported. The inscriptions of King Sargon – the second place the number of those deported at roughly 29270, meaning that a significant number remained. It is these remnants who refer themselves to as Israelites.
According to their ancient folklore and history, as well as Abu I-Fath, author of some of the most comprehensive historical work on Samaritans, the division resulting from the falling out of Eli and the High Priesthood due to errant offering rites might be the original turning point of Samaritan history. It is reported by Anderson & Giles (2012) that Eli made an offering while omitting salt – an important ingredient in the process of making offering to God back then – thus forcing the High Priest Uzzi Ben Bukki to cajole him (p.145).
The resulting arguments and exchanges forced Eli, then a wealthy man of repute, to leave drawing with him a sizeable number of sympathizers. He landed at Shiloh, built a temple like the one Moses ordered built at Mount Gerezim, and started a life there with a healthy following. After all this, Israel was left divided into three factions: one that worshipped according to Gentile idolatry, one that remained with the High Priest at Mount Gerezim, and the one that followed Eli to Shiloh.
Interestingly, Israelite Jews have their account that tries to explain the origin of Samaritans as both an ethnic group, and from a religious stand point. The Samaritan Jew and Israelite Jew version both agree about this up to the point where Assyrian deportation and replacement of the original Israelites took place. Here, Israelite Jews assert that the Samaritan Jews possibly originated from a different group of ethnic communities to what the former group claims. It is reported by Crown (2000) that the children of Israel were deported to Gozan, Halah and Medes, being replaced by the Assyrians with people from Babylon, Cuthah, Avah, Emath, and Sepharvim (p. 353).
Another interesting point as exposed by Costello (1977) in his attempt at deciphering the history of the Samaritan Jews is, “the contradiction between Israelite Jewish accounts of this issue and the Biblical book of Chronicles” (p. 1270. In this book, it is written that King Hezekiah harbored ambitions of uniting the people of Judah with those from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh after the destruction of Samaria. During the time of Josiah, when the temple was being rebuilt, offerings to the cause came from, among other places, “the remnants of Israel” in Samaria, including those from the descendants of Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh. The Prophet Jeremiah also mentions how people from Shechem, Samaria, and Shiloh brought offerings of grain and frankincense as contribution to the temple’s rebuilding process. It is eventually argued that the reported Assyrian resettlement failed, and that a band of Israelites remained in Samaria, settled there as refugees and propagated themselves after the conquest of Judah.
The Samaritan relationship with Israel and Palestine.The Samaritan Jew relationship with Israelite Jews is an ancient affair, probably dating back to the times of Jacob. Fine (2013) acknowledges that among Samaritans, they are direct descendants of his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, making them and Israelite Jews close relatives since Israelites consider themselves descendants of the same man (p. 34). While there were differences arising from various occurrences, such as the divisions caused by Eli, or the Assyrian invasion and destruction of Israel, these two groups remain closely related.
However, from a religious perspective, there are some distinct variation and arguments against each other. Israelite Jews practice strict Judaism according to the teachings of Moses, while Samaritan religion is influenced by Islam, Gentile teachings, as well as watered down versions of Judaism. Some notable differences in the Samaritan and Israeli forms of Judaism are based upon the role of Moses and Mount Gerezim. Samaritans believe Moses shall come back as a restorer while Israeli Jews view him just a messenger and deliverer from Egypt. Mount Gerezim is viewed by Samaritan Jews as the only true sanctuary as opposed to the Israelite perspective on Jerusalem.
Samaritan Jews believe they are an independent people with their own set of norms and well defined cultural practices. They observe the Passover according to their own religious beliefs observing the collection of rites that have been their norm for thousands of years. They dress in flowing robes as their ancestors have done for centuries and only allow the heads of the family to lead during Passover (Gil 1997). They slaughter unblemished lambs, consume unleavened bread called “matzah”, and stay indoors during the feast as has been their tradition for all the years. The rules of male circumcision, kosher dietary habits, and family purity are strictly observed as well.
Although geopolitical differences have placed them in different lands, whereby roughly half the Samaritan population lives in Holon, an Israeli town, while the other half resides in Nablus, a Palestine territory, the people still unite at Kiryat Luza in the West Bank region during the Passover as well as other holidays and family outings. This unity has seen them through many hard times including them current Israeli-Arab struggles. Modernization as well as the Western influence might be evident in the daily lives of the younger generations of Samaritan people, but they still follow their religious obligations to the letter (Hinnebusch 2003). Older generations still dress like the old Biblical times, but even they are not oblivious of the need to embrace modern methods of communication in order to enable their plight to be heard amidst all the Jewish and Islam arguments.
Before the invasion of Palestine, areas of the Middle East and parts of modern day North Africa by Romans, British and Arabs, the Samaritan population was higher as they enjoyed a large degree of autonomist independence. While independent, Samaritan religion, culture and commerce fueled their large numbers that at one time was estimated at more than a million. However, when these invaders came into their lands, they persecuted and oppressed the fewer, weaker Samaritan community, eventually reducing their numbers to fewer than 200 just before the First World War. It is worth noting that after the Arab invasion and subsequent conquest of Palestine in A.D 634, the Samaritan population already present underwent a forced shift in terms of cultural and religious way of life (Mielke et. al 2007). Islamist forced the Islamic religion on any areas they conquered and Holon was no exception.
While most of the Samaritan Jews moved back to Nablus in keeping with the history of their culture and religion, some families decided to move to Holon to follow up on their commercial ambitions. One particular family is credited with instigating this mass movement that saw Samaritan Jews right in the middle of Islamic-Jewish tension between Israel and Palestine. Knoppers (2013) reports how the Tsedaka family activities are seen by many scholars as the turning point of Samaritan Jewish return to Nablus as Yefet Abraham’s move to Holon signaled the start of a proper Samaritan residence in Islamic Palestine (p. 88). His tents, synagogue and cultural center paved way for a proper Samaritan residence when more modern and permanent structures were erected and more Samaritans moved in.
Samaritan positions before the establishment of Israel, their views on Zionism and Palestine.Before the establishment of Israel as a nation, Samaritans enjoyed a large degree of freedom that was subject to the geographical location they found themselves in. Before the time of Jesus, they led a largely normal life characterized by Jewish practice and normal farming and herding lifestyles (Joseph 2005). In the years following 164BC, a period known as the Hellenistic period witnessed the first form of reaction from Samaritans to any form of external interference.
Some small faction formed in Samaria and divided the Samaritans into two groups, one led by the High Priest, and the other the break-away faction that had adopted Hellenizing ideologies.
During the Roman times, which is also the period Jesus of Nazareth was alive on earth Samaritans are mentioned a few times in the gospels under the teachings of Jesus. The most notable of these mentions is the Samaritan woman at the well who served Christ with water and was redeemed for that humble gesture. While Jesus was propagating the gospels to the children of Israel, Samaritans continued to observe and conform to their religion’s teachings all the while facing persecution from Christians and Romans.
Kartveit & Ebrary (2009) report how during the Byzantine period, under Emperor Zeno, Samaritans faced their first encounter with large scale religious persecution (p. 23). The ruler went to Sichem and forced the Samaritans to convert to Christianity without success. Many died on that day marking the first time such large scale destructive force had been used on the ethnic group for religious reasons. In addition, Zeno also went to Mount Gerezim and erected a tomb of his son for the Samaritan worshipers to prostrate themselves before. After such action, Samaritans went against their naturally docile nature and went on a rampage killing Christians, burning churches, and maiming priests in and around Sichem.
Their revolts almost caused the extinction of the community after Emperor Justinian the first brought in Arab reinforcement to crash the revolt in AD 529. This marked the introduction of Arab, and eventually Islam, into the process of oppressing Samaritans before the establishment of Israel (Longva & Roald 2012). After the Muslim conquests, the conquerors met Samaritans occupying a large region spanning across several countries. These people had members of their community all over Egypt, Iran, and Syria, but that changed immediately forced conversion to Islam started. Over the Turkish and Ottoman rule, Samaritans were subjected to persecution, forced conversion to Islam, and unfair taxation as well as government policies. This created a feeling of hatred and distrust for the Muslim majority occupying the lands among Samaritan minority.
This oppression changed to small extent after the British occupation of Palestine between 1920 and 1948. During the time, the largely imperialist white man was involved in establishing British influence in the area and thought it wise to empower Samaritans by allowing some freedoms. In light of the centuries spent under forced conversion to Islam, unfair policies and taxation by their previous oppressors, this new people were readily welcomed, especially after provisions were made to place a Samaritan in the Shechem Municipality to agitate for their grievances (Sela &EBSCO 1997). These favors, though stringed to some conditions, readily appealed to the small Samaritan community already tired of oppression. It did not come as surprise that during the Israeli declaration of independence and the ensuing wars, Samaritan readily supported whoever the imperialist supported – the Zionist.
The Samaritan position during the Arab vs. Israeli Jewish wars.
Muslims in their entirety have always been against the establishment and propagation of an Israeli nation. So much, that Palestine refers to the period in 1948 during the formation of the Israeli state a disaster. All that negativity towards Jews by Arabs especially had been manifested in their four attempts at destabilizing, and indeed defeating, the state of Israel, but all attempts have been futile with some even embarrassingly so. All the while, the position of Samaritan Jews has been one of great interest seeing how half of the minority group resides in the Arab Palestine region of Nablus, while the other resides in Israel’s Holon region.
Persecution and other factors had decimated Samaritans to a mere 150 individuals as at the early nineteen hundreds, but with the efforts of both the community itself and the surrounding states, the number rose to healthy numbers soon enough. However, even with the increased numbers and more attention from neighbors, Samaritans chose to remain impartial to the rapidly shifting geo-political situation unfolding in the area (Smith 1993). Israel had just become a state much to the chagrin of neighboring Arab and Muslim nations who viewed the Jews with contempt and distaste.
In conforming with their ancestry as well as for survival purposes, Samaritans tend to align themselves to the Israeli side in terms of political affiliation. However, a Samaritan did not singlehandedly stand up and declare enemity for either Israel or Palestine until 1960. A Samaritan leader called Al-Kahen Wasef al-Samery stood and declared that Israel was as much an enemy for them as Palestine was, creating the first signs of allegiance to a side in the tense region. In effect, the leader had singled out Samaritans as independent and willing to fight for their freedom at a time when Israel was finding itself surrounded by potential foes. This was further aggravated by the Samaritan population trying to indirectly align itself to Palestine by declaring the Israeli as oppressive and unfair.
As much as the Samaritans remained non-partisan to the Israeli-Arab wars and strife, their allegiance was secretly with the small nation facing the older, more determined Islamic neighbors surrounding her. Israel for the Samaritans was not only the imperialists’ favorite, but the chosen sanctuary for all the Jews regardless, meaning any threat to that land was a direct attack to their homeland (Soyer 2007). Although they were not keen to demonstrate this support for fear of the imminent reprisals, Samaritans started supporting the cause indirectly through methods such as joining the Israeli armed forces, on the Holon side, and complete ignorance on the Palestine and Arab Jordanian side.
However heated this period was for the Samaritan people, and the high tension surrounding the actions of all involved, they eventually resumed their non-partisan role of not supporting anyone in the region for fear of the ramifications to the small, weak community. In addition to this fears, was the threat of their people dying off due to some genetic disease caused by a small gene pool. Restoration activities were instead initiated with the aim of strengthening the community through intermarriage with Israelite women. Although these new wives and mothers had to accept to renounce the Israeli Jewish religion in favor of the Samaritan one, the four left Samaritan families (Cohen, Danfi, Tsedakah, and Marhib) were able to save the community using this unorthodox, yet necessary method.
Complete restoration according to Thomas (2011) of the community has been enabled by the growth of Israel as both a state and a refuge for Jews running away from persecution (p. 29). After the establishment of the state via a declaration of independence in 1948, Israel formulated a special rule to enable the repatriation of all Jews in the world to their rightful homeland. Known as the Law of Return, this rule justifies the return of any Jew in the world to Israel as long as they are not going to harm Jews, cause trouble, cause harm, or public outcry. As long as one was born to a Jewish mother, or had converted to Judaism, they could enter the country up to 1992 when a petition was passed barring the entry of Samaritans into the country since their mothers were not Jews. However, this petition was challenged in 1994 resulting in a continued influx of Samaritans into Israel (Thomas 2010).
Similarities between Samaritan Jews and Palestine Arabs. Samaritan Jews and Palestine Arabs both practice a monotheistic religions characterized by the worship of one God. They both have special names for their God, with Samaritans calling God Yahweh, and Palestine Arabs referring to Allah. Both consider themselves the only true worshipers of His power and glory with all other groups generally considered as non-believers and damned. This is the most obvious similarity between Samaritans and Palestine Arabs.
Both groups have the highest regard for a set way of life that has been outlined by their deities. The Samaritans have high regard for the Pentateuch and consider this the divinely ordained way of life. It is characterized by a detailed guide of how one should worship cloth, marry, feed, correlate with fellow faithful, and other aspects of religious and normal life as outlined in the Holy Scriptures. Muslims make reference to the Quran’s equivalent to the Pentateuch for guidance on how to conduct them self. In addition, appropriate punitive action, as well as course of remedial action, is also outlined in the same scripture (Amirav 2009).
The religious teaching according to both groups, the Samaritan Jews and Palestine Arab ones, teach one basic concept – that of respect and reverence for the messenger. Samaritans believe in the teaching of Yahweh as outlined by his messenger Moses, while Palestine Arabs make reference to Allah‘s will as passed on by his messenger Prophet Muhammad (Sahid 1995). Both clearly advocate for a respect of prophets and their wisdom as they were chosen to convey God’s will to errant humans and bring upon salvation to the wise that would heed.
While Christians believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God sent to die for the salvation of his flock, both Samaritans and Palestine Arabs disassociate themselves from such doctrines. They share the belief that Jesus was another messenger and that his claim to be the Son of God are both unfounded and untrue. Samaritans don’t have much regard for any teaching beyond the Pentateuch as these are, according to their beliefs, the only necessary religious guidelines needed for salvation. Palestine Arabs, like their Muslim friends, simply don’t believe that Jesus was the Son of God (Zen 2010).
In matters regarding the roles of women and children in both social and religious ceremonies, the Samaritan and Arab religions are quite oppressive allocating these the role of subservient spectators (Wilson 1990). Women are expected to cloth in a way that covers their modesty and hides parts of their bodies that could be objectified. On the other hand, men are placed on a pedestal as rulers on almost all aspects of the social, family, judicial, and religious life. For example, in the Samaritan way of life, even in the absence of a man in the family, it had to be a stranger that led that family during their Passover ceremony.
Both the Samaritan and Palestine Arab religious practices make reference to a holy shrine from where a major religious action is believed to have occurred. The Samaritans observe Passover by travelling to Kiryat Luza to observe their ceremony from there. Similarly, Muslim have an annual pilgrimage to Mecca for the same reasons as advised and justified by their religious teachings.
Differences between Samaritans and Palestine Arabs.Palestine Arabs, and indeed all Muslims, believe in the jihad – a holy war that is generally intended to defend their faith as well as the welfare of all Muslims. Samaritans on the other hand are generally a peaceful lot who do not advocate for the use of violence unless in defending their self. While there are records of instances of Samaritan invasions on innocent people, these were deemed necessary as was the fulfillment of God’s will, who instructed the attacks according to Holy Scriptures.
Titus (2007) shows how Samaritans are on record as more inclined towards activities that were based on the production of consumer goods (p. 170). They were farmers where land was arable, teachers, herders and nomadic pastoralists. Palestine Arabs like most of their fellow Muslims were astute traders and merchants. Although Samaritans adopted the practice of commerce, this indeed happened much later than Muslims who are thought to have played an integral role in the spread of commerce and barter trade. In general, Samaritans never ventured away from the areas surrounding Mount Gerezim and Jerusalem until the hardships of persecution during dark ages of Holocaust forced them to flee. On the other hand, Arabs, Palestine Arabs included, are in the history books for their attempts at, among other things, commerce, exploration, spreading Islam.
Conclusion.The emergence of Israel as a young nation amidst the largely hostile, Islamic neighbors has been seen as the reason Samaritan Jews find themselves in the tricky situation they currently are in. However, as the paper demonstrated, the circumstances surrounding Samaritan placement and their current woes are far from the sum of a young country trying to gain the freedom for its people. The influence of ancient activities such as: the spread of Christianity, Islam, resultant revolts, and complex geo-political ambitions during the colonial times have been shown to be collectively responsible.
However, Samaritan welfare has been demonstrated to be the result of more of brains than brawn. While their neighbors are embroiled in a bitter battle for ideological and religious purposes, the small band of conservative Samaritans chose to remain non-partisan to all the violence and politicking. All the while, their allegiance is secretly with their brothers – the Israelite Jews. Although there is more than meets the eye in this issue, the basic and most crucial point to remember among the many we have encountered is that Samaritan welfare is an important aspect of the larger issues present in the Middle East. That they have lasted this long at the intersection of all those battles seems to point to some divine intervention.
References
Anderson, R. T., & Giles, T. (2012). The Samaritan Pentateuch: An introduction to its origin, history, and significance for biblical studies. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
Anderson, R. T., & Giles, T. (2012). The Samaritan Pentateuch: An introduction to its origin, history, and significance for biblical studies. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
Costello, V. F. (1977). Urbanization in the Middle East. Cambridge, Eng: Cambridge University Press.
Crown, A. D. (2000). Samaritan scribes and manuscripts. Tübingen: Mohr.
E. J. Brill’s first Encyclopaedia of Islam: 1913-1936 f ed. by M. Th. Houtsma, A. J. Wensinck, H. A. R. Gibb… [et al.]. (1993). (E. J. Brill’s first Encyclopaedia of Islam, 7-9.) Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Fine, S. (2013). Art, history and the historiography of judaism in the greco-roman world. Leiden: Brill.
Gil, M. (1997). A history of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hinnebusch, R. A. (2003). The international politics of the Middle East. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
In Mielke, R., In Al, H. M., Du, B. I., Smidt, N., & Spitzer-Shohat, S. (2007). Cultural diversity and the empowerment of minorities: Perspectives from Israel & Germany. New York: Berghahn Books.
Joseph, S. (2005). Family, law and politics. Leiden [u.a.: Brill.
Kartveit, M., & Ebrary, Inc (2009). The origin of the Samaritans. Leiden [u.a.: Brill.
Knoppers, G. N. (2013). Jews and Samaritans: The origins and history of their early relations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Longva, A. N., & Roald, A. S. (2012). Religious minorities in the Middle East: Domination, self-empowerment, accommodation. Leiden: Brill.
Sela, A., & EBSCOhost (1997). The Decline of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: Middle East Politics and the Quest for Regional Order. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Smith, B. J. (1993). The roots of separatism in Palestine: British economic policy, 1920-1929. Syracuse [New York: Syracuse University Press.
Soyer, F. (2007). The persecution of the Jews and Muslims of Portugal: King Manuel I and the end of religious tolerance (1496-7). Leiden: Brill.
Šahīd, I. (1995). Byzantium and the Arabs in the sixth century: 1,2. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Coll.
Thomas, A. (2010). Israel & the Palestinian territories. Footscray, Vic: Lonely Planet.
Wilson, M. C. (1990). King Abdullah, Britain, and the making of Jordan. Cambridge [England: Cambridge University Press.
ʻAmirav, M. (2009). Jerusalem syndrome: The Palestinian-Israeli battle for the Holy City. Brighton [England: Sussex Academic Press.
Advisory report
Advisory report
Introduction
Included in the core elements of public governance is policy formulation and planning (Sykes et al, 34). It is necessary to determine the meaning of a public policy, which is a deliberate decision that is carefully studied to provide guidance that addresses special public concerns. The process of policymaking involves the government translation of their political visions into actions or programs that is likely to deliver desired changes in the state. The policies provide a framework that for setting planning, which is necessary for outlining how the policies can be implemented. One of the most vital considerations that are instrumental in coming up with public policies is that during the planning process, it is essential to incorporate citizen participation, which ensures the democratization of the entire process. The active involvement of the members of public would possibly ensure the effectiveness of the policy.
While referring to the situation in the Indian reservation lands in the southwest of California, this advisory report looks into some of the relevant information that will aid in discussions between the governor and representatives from the Indian tribes from California. The talks consider the fact that the government is legally not in a position to infringe on the private property rights of the Indian tribes of California. With this situation, it would be necessary to consider talks that would create a suitable agreement between the government and the community. By assuming a participatory policy-making framework, it would be possible for the two groups to achieve transparency, accountability, as well as active citizenship. This will also mean that the parties will follow some of the legal considerations, which is necessary for avoiding conflicts.
Background
The need for talks between representatives from the Indian tribes and the governor emanates from the discovery of oil reserves located in the Indian reservation lands in the southeast of California. The discovery was a result of some construction work that was taking place in the region. However, the amount from the discovery is not known, which is a situation that creates a need for further exploration. Even though the amount of oil reserve is not definite, suggestions from the first signs indicate a possibility that the amount could be huge. Nevertheless, getting consent for further exploration requires approval from the residents of the area since the land they occupy is private property.
After indications of the presence of an oil reserve in the area, the California Indian Council issued a statement directed to the state government that further exploration, as well as future exploration in the area would only be possible if some of their demands were met. The California Indian Council is a group that links the Native American Indians from several tribes living in California. The council was demanding an agreement that would require the state to start bilingual education programs in the area, meant for the native American Indians living in California, which is a proposal that is within their rights. Since there is a need for the country to find more energy resources existing within its border, coming up with a strategy that will initiate an agreement between the community and the government will be beneficial. For this reason, it would be vital to find a suitable approach that will precipitate the realization of this initiative.
Issues for consideration
The first thing to consider is that bilingual education is a program that helps students less proficient in the English language, for instance the Native American Indian students (Zimmerman 66). Such a program helps students with a limited English proficiency to keep up with some of the academic requirements in the American educational system. The students need to have the knowledge of English for it will enable them to become successful in the American schools, which is a factor that might have been considered by the California Indian Council. With this consideration, the governor has to choose between two approaches, which includes heeding to the demands of the California Indian Council or denying them this demand.
Several issues might arise when the governor heeds to this demand. One of the gravest issues that might come up is that the other minority ethnic groups might react negatively to this provision. The minority group denied this opportunity might site a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits any form of discrimination based on national origin (Hames et al 168). Instead, they would equally demand for access to bilingual education, which might require a change in the educational policy of the country. Changing the educational policies will not only be tedious but there are financial implications that might come about because of the changes. This change might not be feasible for the government since minority groups are scattered across the country, which means that there is a probability that the groups would demand for the same treatment for their students. With these provisions, it would not be feasible to consider the Native American Indian students as a special lot in the number of immigrant students present in the country.
The other issue that might occur with bilingual education is related to the cost. The costs that the government might have to incur upon the consideration of offering bilingual education to the Native American Indian students are predictably high. The financial implications attached to offering this education is that the state should be able to construct new classes, employ new teachers and acquire other resources that might be unavailable currently. With the consideration that the government might have to source for more funds to promote this system of education, the provision might seem impossible. For this reason, the debate on whether there are sufficient funds to support this cause might appear to be redundant. The available funds might be insufficient to ensure that the students get satisfactory results. With the cost implication consideration, it would be necessary to make the California Indian Council aware, which might help them in deliberating whether the provision is possible.
Policies that Brown could attempt to adopt
One of the policies that Brown can attempt to adopt is to set a transition period that is restricted to a number of years for the program. This period would be beneficial for the students for it might enable them to master the English language before moving into the mainstream educational system. This consideration is necessary for ensuring that the Native American Indian children fit into the school society after learning some of the basic things that will improve their prowess in the English language. Since the system of bilingual education will require new teachers, who help in the transition, Brown should propose a number of years, for instance two years that a student would be allowed to attend the classes. This is a proposal that might benefit these students since they will be able to communicate effectively using the English language. With this consideration, the community should be able to allow the government to exploit the oil reserve in the region, also allowing for future exploration when the need arises.
The consequences of this provision include the benefit that the government is likely to obtain from the exploration, eventually increasing the energy reserves in the country. This is not only likely to increase the government’s income, but it will also be beneficial to the native American Indian community since their children will get the opportunity to be fully integrated in the community through the bilingual education system. On the other hand, the state government will have to incur further costs for providing this education for the Native American Indian students.
Recommendation
It would be beneficial for both parties if the governor would be able to adopt the proposed policy. It is necessary to consider that cultural, as well as immigration integration is not something easy to deal with since different communities within the country have their own views of what they think would be beneficial for the community. By adopting this policy, it would be necessary for Brown to insist on the fact that the restrictive number of years for the bilingual education would benefit the students to blend into the largely English-speaking American society. This means that the governor has to find ways of satisfying the other educational needs of the minority groups in the state in order to avoid violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Hames et al 168).
Works cited
Hames, Joanne B, and Yvonne Ekern. Constitutional Law: Principles and Practice. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning, 2013. Print.
Ornstein, Allan C, Daniel U. Levine, and Gerald L. Gutek. Foundations of Education. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.
Sykes, Gary, Schneider, Barbara, and Plank, David, N. The AERA handbook on educational policy research. Routledge, 2012. Print.
Zimmerman, Lynn W. Esl, Efl, and Bilingual Education: Exploring Historical, Sociocultural, Linguistic, and Instructional Foundations. Charlotte, N.C: Information Age Pub, 2010. Print.