In other news nationalism is stupid.  Is anyone surprised?

The hilariously ignorant attitude to the Roman Empire (is anyone speaking latin today, lol) is only matched by the irrelevant nonsense (we have commerce, trade and diplomacy!  ISRAEL RULEZ SOMEHOW).  It even ends on a massive distortion; that they're 'still here', as if there was no diaspora and Israel wasn't invented by the UN after WW2 and backed constantly by the richest and most powerful country in the world.  But hey, they still speak the same language... or... something.

If they're going to make outrageous statements with regard to the Roman Empire (ps let's play 'what is a major influence on law in Europe') let's play 'how many times was the Jewish state destroyed or conquered'.  It only happened to the Romans once. lol

The idea that a nationalist screed claims that they don't fear anything is the best part for me, even after the irrelevances and misrepresentations of history.  If you're not afraid, that probably explains why you harp on military success so much, right?  Australians aren't 'afraid' either, so somehow ... profit?  

What I really want to know is what about non-Israeli Jews?  Don't whole sectors of the Jewish community oppose the whole idea of Israel (I believe due to the idea that man can't create the kingdom or something)?  Is it still great to be a Jew in Australia?  Or is it better, because there's no big scary Arabs around to be 'not afraid' of? lol

Pnakotus,

I don't get why you "laugh out loud" after every few sentences, but I think it is appropriate.

Perhaps you have missed a few thousands years of history but the fact that the Jews survived as a people really is extraordinary. Living through 2000 years of persecution they survived several genocides and kept their culture and religion. And since 1948 Israel has survived four wars intended to destroy the country.

It only happened to the Romans once. Yes. That's the point. It happened to Israel countless time, yet we are still here.

 

I am a non-Israeli Jew. And I spent the last two weeks searching bags, sweeping the area around the synagogue for bombs, and keeping in contact with local police. I can tell you that Israel has its advantages over the diaspora. We are more difficult targets when we are united and able to shoot back.

There are two major groups of Jews, the Ashkenazim (German or European Jews) which you find in Europe, Russia, and the US, and the Sephardim and Mizrachim (Spanish and middle-eastern Jews) which are about 5% or so of the Jewish population of the US (at most) and mostly fled to Israel from Arab countries. Most Jews in Israel are Sephardim and Mizrachim.

There are non-Zionist Jews, but they are a somewhat tiny minority, mostly religious fanatics (every religion has them), and the vast majority of them are Ashkenazim who live in countries currently safe for Jews (so they don't need Israel). In German the Reform movement was anti-Zionist, until Hitler came. Now they are dead except for those who fled to Israel before the Germans caught them.

In general anti-Zionism was a bad deal for Jews.

A famous saying in the 1940s was "we [Ashkenazim] had to learn to become Zionists, you [Sephardim] already were". It refers to the fact that while many Ashkenazim lived in safe countries (except those who lived in Europe), the middle-eastern Jews (broadly referred to as Sephardim) did not.

But then I am constantly surprised by the talks about "non-Israeli Jews" and the state of Israel as if not having the state would be an alternative. Where should middle-eastern Jews live? Would Europe and America take them? Would it be acceptable to the world to deport millions of Semitic-speaking middle-easteners to the western world? (I am sure it wouldn't be a problem. But move an Arab a mile from his birth place and the world screams genocide.)

They cannot go back to their "home" countries. They faced then and would face now death and slavery. (The only places I would trust to guarantee their safety would be Morocco and Kurdistan, the latter being a non-Arab region.) And if Israel hadn't existed, the Jews of the middle-east would simply have been another forgotten minority, enslaved like the Dinka, murdered like the Massalith, gassed like the Kurds, or, in the best case scenario (which rarely applies to Jewish minorities), ignored and disadvantaged as second-class citizens, like Assyrians, Aramaeans and Imazighen.

One of the biggest feeder countries to Israel was Iraq. During the 1940s, when Iraq was allied with Nazi Germany, and the 1950s hundreds of thousands of Jews fled to Israel. (The reason Sderoth is called a town and not a "refugee camp" is because Jews are not "refugees" as per the UN definition.)

But even in Israel they were not safe. When the Arab countries attacked in 1948, guess what the local Arabs did. Did they help defend the Jews? Did they run away? Did they join the attackers?

I'll tell you what happened: All three happened.

One third of the local Arabs helped defend the new country. They were mostly Bedouins (themselves an oppressed minority) and Druze. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amos_Yarkoni.

One third ran away, following a call of their Arab brethren to do so.

One third, under the leadership of Hitler's Mufti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler's_Mufti) fought against the Jews. His nephew Yasser "Arafat" continued the "struggle" after his death. Many fought under Egyptian command against the people, Jews and Arabs, of the country they called "Palestine": http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3623011/We-were-brought-up-to-hate---and-we-do.html.

Either way, Jews have learned that they cannot trust non-Jews to help them if the "death to the Jews" crowd comes to get them.

Well, we can trust the Bedouins and the Druze. G-d bless them.

 

We are not afraid because we believed we could have such military success. And nobody else believed it at the time. In the middle east Jews were second-class subjects (if not slaves) and were thought to be cowards and no good at fighting. Israel's victory over several Arab countries, armed and trained by the British, was a huge surprise and totally changed the power dynamics in the region.

Nobody in the middle-east thought that those lowly creatures, second only to black slaves in low social standing, would not only fight but also win. It was totally unexpected. The Arabs couldn't believe it and for the next few decades started every war in the belief that they would (finally) easily destroy Israel and kill the rebelling Jews. (Remember that all other non-Arab nations in the middle-east were totally dominated by the Arabs. The Jews were the only ones who stood up to them.)

And nobody in the middle east believed that a "primitive" Bedouin could lead a high tech army into victory.

 

I wonder, had the GP posted something similar but with respect to the aryan/nordic races, how would the rest of forum-goers have taken it? my guess is "not well".

Racial pride: just as stupid today as it's ever been.

Me, reading this topic made me *ashamed* of having jewish blood, rather than proud of it. Why would I care about some guys halfway across the globe? just because they have similar racial backgrounds as I do? stupid.

What do you mean "races"? The Jews are a people, not a "race".

Have you never seen any other nation celebrate itself and its achievements? You must lead a dull life.




Nothing in the text is about "racial pride". The author is proud of what the Jews have achieved, not of what they are.




Your Jewish blood doesn't count for anything. It's the common culture and language that counts. I can tell you why I care about some guys halfway accross the globe. We are family. They don't have a "similar racial background" as I do (they might be white or black or ethnic Chinese), but we are family.

We speak the same language (some of us attempt it), pray to the same god, perform the same rituals at the same time, have the same values, have the same enemies, and come from the same country.

And you know what? While you are "ashamed" to be of Jewish blood, I aspire to be as good as they are. I feel ashamed to when I read what other Jews have achieved, because it tells me that I have not yet contributed as much as some others and perhaps never will.

I tell you what else, and I rarely mention this, but I am also proud of the German people, my other background. What Germany has achieved since World War 2 is most impressive and also something to aspire too. Does that make you ashamed of your German blood (if you have any, which is likely if you have an Ashkenazi Jewish background)?

Perhaps you have to change your thinking from your focus on "blood" to a focus on "culture". I think it's people like you, i.e. people who use words like "blood" and "race" as if they meant something, who are the problem.

Here's a picture for you that might cure you from your "race" fixation. Behold a selection of the Jewish people. The woman in front with the back to the camera is the mother of my Hebrew teacher.

http://web.mac.com/ajbrehm/Resources/AccoRothschild.html#9

We only met that day in the Rothshild park. But we spoke the same language and belong to the same people. We were family.

Nope. Still don't get it.

 

KFC, what do you think about this?

 

ISLAM AND NORMALIZATION OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ISLAMIC STATES AND THE JEWISH STATE

PLO documents can in no way be regarded as Islamic. The PLO leaders are a gang of criminals and thieves, and Arabs will be the main victims of any supposed "Palestinian State" under their leadership.

I do not believe that Islam is the factor preventing normalization between Arabs and the State of Israel. The real problem is that members of the ruling classes in Arab countries believe their authority and power would be threatned by democracy, modernization, and education in the Arab world. They use a distorted interpretation of Islam as a political tool, and unfortunately the majority of uneducated Arabs believe their poisonous propaganda.

I believe that we must return to the time when Islam was in the vanguard of scientific progress and interfaith dialogue. Instead of false "leaders" such as Qadhafi, Saddam Hussein, Arafat or Yasin, we Muslims again need true leaders such as al-Ghazali, Ibn Rushd and Ibn Khaldum.

King Faysal of Iraq said: "The Arabs, and particularly the educated ones among them, must look at the Zionist movement with the deepest sympathy."

Tragically, true leaders such as Faysal were silenced, and fanatics such as Haj Amin al-Husseini prevailed.

The evil consequences of the victory of fanaticism are clear for all to see: Jews expelled from Arab countries where the lived in peace for over one thousand years, "Palestinian" refugees, terrorism, etc. To avoid future mistakes, we must learn from our past ones.

Unfortunately, there are Arabs who believe that they must fight against Israel until they completely destroy it (a tragedy which I do not believe the God of Israel will ever permit to happen - Never again!).

Unfortunately, there are also naive and foolish Israelis who believe, incredibly to me, that they will achieve "peace" with their Arab neighbours by giving the murderer "Arafat" a State, an army, etc. This is insane. You Jews are supposedly famous for your intelligence. How can some of your "leaders" be so stupid?

http://www.templemount.org/quranland.html

 

 

Define "people".

The difference being...?

So the post wasn't about the jewish race, but about the jewish religion? then my apologies to any non-jewish (religion) jew (race) I may have offended. And no, under most sane definitions of the word you're not "family", please strive for accuracy over poetic flavor.

The first four I understand, as result of a common religion, but the same "enemies"? and same "country"? Israel has only existed for ~60 years so it can't have had anything to do with the Spanish Inquisition et al and, therefore, isn't the country in question. Which one is it, then?

I do, and no I'm not ashamed. Because I've yet to see a German posting about what the "German people" have achieved, they may talk about how well their government has done their job but don't associate it to anything inherent in them as a race/country/religion-followers/whatever. Kinda like how the rest of the world talks, y'know?

No, perhaps you should invent a new term for either the jewish race or the jewish religion, so people don't get them mixed up.

So, the religion. Sweet. So the Jewish faith has officially joined the ranks of Christianity, Catholicism, Protestanism, Islam, Hinduism and a thousand other religions who managed to survive 'til the year 2009. Still can't see why it'd make you proud to believe in the same God as a survivor from the Inquisition did, lest of all why you'd all insist on using the word "we" to describe such events when clearly you didn't personally participate in them.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/people

See definition 3.

Or look up "nation" in an encyclopedia.




I'm afraid explaining difference between what people are and what people do is quite a difficult task and perhaps justifies a blog post in itself, if not a book of several volumes.

I'll gladly refer you to Martin Luther King, who perhaps put it best when he spoke of his dream that one day people will be judged not by the colour of their skin (who they are) but by the contents of their character (what they do).




1. There is no "Jewish race". It was an invention by the Nazis and I find it extremely upsetting that people still think in those terms.

2. The letter spoke of the Jewish _people_, not the Jewish religion. Not all Jews are religious.

Poetic flavour is what makes a culture. Jews do indeed see each other as "family" whether you like it or not. Your own way of referring to Jews as a "race" and your ignorance of the concept of a "people" is in itself a problem with accuracy that you might have to look at.




We have had the common language since before we have had the religion. Hebrew is a Canaanite language spoken by the people who lived south of Lebanon 4000 years ago. It is closely related to Phoenician and less closely to Aramaic and Arabic.

The country of Israel has existed since 1400 BCE and has been under different rulers since then, again becoming independent in 1948.

Alexander the Great did not invade a non-existing place, he invaded Israel. Cyrus the Great before Alexander did not return the Jews to a place that doesn't exist, he returned them to Israel. And Caliph Umar did not call on the Jews to fall into a black hole, he called on them to return to the land of Israel. The Qur'an, in suras 5 and 17 does not refer to a non-existing place when it claims that the land was given to the people of Israel, it referred to the land of Israel.

There is ample proof that a country named Israel has existed for over a thousand years before the Greeks invaded it and it didn't stop existing while being ruled by others either. I live in Ireland and most people here would be rather surprised if you told them that Ireland didn't exist when it was under English rule. Of course it did. And the Irish are from here.

The Spanish inquisition did indeed affect the Jewish people, although mostly those who converted to Christianity (since the inquisitors only had jurisdiction over baptised subjects of the king, not non-Christian Jews or Muslims).




Perhaps you don't read enough or you are simply to focused on that "race" fixation of yours.

I have seen lots of articles and essays written by many people about the achievements of their nation. Heck, have you ever heard Americans talk about the American people? Nothing wrong with being proud of one's people, if one aspires to becoming part of the achievers.

If you think that Jews are a "race" and are the only ones who talk like that of their own people, you are seriously deluding yourself.




Why should I invent a "new term" for either the "Jewish race" (which doesn't exist) or the "Jewish religion", which the article isn't talking about.

And which people apart from you got them mixed up?

KFC posted the article and she isn't Jewish. I am sure she understands what a "people" (or a "nation") is and what a religion is and I don't think she was confused by those concepts (or felt a need to bring "race" into this).

What exactly is the "Jewish race" anyway? Are we black or are we white? What about ethnic Chinese Jews? What's the point of even worrying about race?

Let me tell you that I totally don't understand why Jews would be a "race" or why "race" is relevant in this context at all. (I understand race is relevant in certain medical cases when certain diseases are related to genetics. For example Sickle Cell Anemia depends on certain genes. But that has nothing to do with achievements of the affected people.)




I don't know if all the people in the picture are religious. Those with the kippas probably are. The others I don't know. They could be secular or atheists. But they were Jews.

Can you perhaps try to leave religion and race out of this? I think you are seriously impeding your chances of understanding what's going on by limiting your thoughts to questions of religion (which is nice but not the point here) and race (which is entirely inappropriate).

When I talk about the achievements of the Germans in the last 60 years (achievements which I applaud), I am not talking about their religion (mostly Christianity) or their race (most are white*), I am talking solely about the people.

Not religion. Not race. People.

(*Except those, apparently, who are also Jewish. They would belong to the "Jewish race", right?)




Again, it's the people, not the religion we are talking about.

But yes, both the people and the religion have survived, despite the fact that both were under constant attacks, they survived several genocides. Also note that Judaism, the religion, is 2000 years older than the other religions you mention there (except Hinduism which started in the iron age, but Judaism is older even than that).

Nobody ever set out to exterminate all Christians, but several have tried exactly that with the Jews. If for you surviving the Holocaust is the same as sitting in a chair for a few years, I'd find it difficult to explain to you why some people are so amazed that Judaism is still with us.

Also I know that KFC's point was really that the Jewish people are still around. She doesn't care about the religion except in as much as it is the predecessor of Christianity and an attribute of the Jewish people. That is all fine and good but it should tell you that the point here was not the Jewish religion.




When I was a student in Haifa Hizbullah fired rockets at my university.

When I went to Iraq, Kurdish miliamen were amazed to meet a Jew and told me not to tell anyone further south.

Over the last two weeks I did security at my synagogue, checked bags for bombs and coordinated with Irish police.

The events you refer to are not history, they still happen. And while I have seen neither the inquisition nor the Holocaust (although I know many people who have seen the latter), I have seen anti-Semitism to a degree you cannot imagine.

And ALL OF IT came from individuals who believe Jews are a "race", usually one bred from dogs and monkies, if I recall correctly.

It is weird that just 65 years after being referred to as a "race", the Jews have suddenly lost the right to be considered a "people".

Maybe you'll find this enlightening:

http://web.mac.com/ajbrehm/Home/Blog/Entries/2009/3/15_More_Moishe_Hundesohn.html

(It's translated from the original German. And yes, I have the right to translate and publish Moishe Hundesohn comics on my homepage.)

 

I'd like the be more specific.

The Romans actually did set out to exterminate all Christians (including Jesus himself). But they did it because at the time the Christians were Jews.

Ever since Christianity and Judaism split up, Christians were not usually targeted for extermination (although currently in the middle they are being persecuted, as are non-Christian minorities).

 

I'm not totally sure how Islam is going to play itself out when it comes to the "latter days" although the Arab countries are going to go up against Israel and they do represent their religion Islam.  I pulled out this quote:

This is true.  This is going to happen.  Somehow a peace treaty will be confirmed and the Jews will be duped. I'm just wondering how this will exactly play out.  Maybe the rebuilding of the temple will come into play?   The world will finally believe we are going to have peace at last.  It's a trick and will last only a short time.  You have to know this Leauki.  The only one who can broker Peace is the Messiah.  Look at Zechariah 12-14 very carefully.  We are instructed to pray for the peace of Jerusalem from way back.  We must continue to do this. 

Actually they were both Gentile and Jewish Christians.  After the death of Christ it was the Jews who were coming into the faith as the Apostles were going into the synagogues.  That was the normal place to speak.  A Jewish Apostle speaking to the Jews during their assembly times.  Many listened to the OT scriptures and shown how Christ was the Messiah that had come as prophesied.   Then in the house of Cornelius, a centurion, the first Gentile convert was brought into the faith.  (Acts 10).  After that, droves of Gentiles came to the faith just as droves of Jewish families came before them. 

The persecution of the Christians (Jew and Gentile)  by Nero was intense starting before the fall of Jerusalem (70AD) and continued to the 4th century where Constantine declared Christianity a state religion (start of the RCC).  By then there were more Gentiles than there were Jews coming to the faith. 

But yes, Rome was out for the Christians right up until the 4th century when they figured out they couldn't beat them so why not join them and a business was born. 

Today what we are seeing is both anti-Semitism and persecution of Christians all over the world.  It has deeply rooted spiritual implications.  What we are seeing is only the fruit.  The deep roots are hidden and where all the work is being carefully planned and executed underground.   It's going to get much worse.  We've only seen the tip of the iceburg.  Wait and see.  I don't believe it's very far off. 

 

 

I quote, then:

 3. pl. peo·ples A body of persons sharing a common religion, culture, language, or inherited condition of life.

Clearly they're not excluding, so "geeks" are people and "spanish" are people, but you can still be a "spanish geek". So I ask again, more clearly: what conditions are necessary and sufficient to qualify as a "Jew"? I was only aware of the racial (which you argue doesn't exist, I'm no anthropologist so dunno) and religious ones (which you argue isn't valid), so I'm all ears.

And I must note that, in the same page you linked near the bottom, there is a definition for using "people" reffering to race or ethnic background.

My reading of MLK's quote is that he meant he wanted people to be judged as individuals and not what their "group" had done, which would run counter to your idea of praising the achievements of the jewish people (rather than separate individuals who just happened to be jewish, as I argue). Regardless, it's something up to personal interpretation and, in any case, depends on my question posted above.

As I mentioned above, I'm not an anthropologist so I don't know whether you're right or wrong, but Wikipedia does mention the "Jewish ethnicity", which is what I was thinking of when talking about "race" (ie, people associated through common heritage).

Poetic flavour makes for informal definitions, and informal definitions lead to semantical arguments. The use of the term "people" in plural is one such word, being able to categorize different groups of (singular) people by differing criteria in a non-exclusive way (as noted above), which is why I chose to ignore it in favor of the more formal definitions I knew.

Yeah, I forgot about *those*, but my beef with nationalistic US-born idiots is a matter for another time. And yes, there *is* in my opinion something very much wrong in singing the praises of a group of people where only a minority of the individuals comprising it is directly responsible for the achievements being praised. I don't praise the British Army for fighting against the Nazis, for instance, I praise the British soldiers who fought in World War 2, modern-day British soldiers didn't do a thing back then, so they don't deserve any praise for it.

We hold different definitions of "country", then. Mine is legal, and the country of Israel didn't legally exist until 1948. Jews existed before then, of course, but tying both definitions together would mean there could be no such thing as a "jewish french" or "non-jewish israeli" which holds problems of its own.

I know, but my point was: *you*, the individual, lived through that but not the Spanish Inquisition, *they* the individuals lived through the Spanish Inquisition but not the events you described. Why put them all together? why not recognize the merits of *individuals* instead of seeing people as, well, "people" in the plural, whatever your definition of that is?

I am sorry, but if you don't understand what a "people" or a "nation" are, it will be very difficult to talk to you.

You are thinking in terms of race, and I don't understand that view. I am thinking in terms of nations and you don't know what a nation is.

 

Again, the country if Israel did legally exist from 1300 BCE until the Assyrian invasion and then again as a client kingdom of first the Persian and then the Greek/Roman Empire.

Then came nearly 2000 years of foreign rule until World War 1 when Israel became a British territory which became independent in 1948.

 

I think you have problems not only with the concept of a nation but also with the difference between a country and a nation.

There are Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis. Specifically there are Israeli citizens of Jewish nationality, Arab nationality, Armenian nationality, Druze (another Arab) nationality, and Circassian nationality.

Similarly that are Russian citizens of Russian nationality, of Jewish nationality, of Karelian nationality, of German nationality and so on. The nationality is specified in the passport.

In Turkey, per its constitution, you have Turkish citizens of Turkish nationality, Greek nationality, Armenian nationality, and Jewish nationality. The Kurds are not recognised as a nation in Turkey.

In Iraq you have Arab nationals, Kurdish nationals, Assyrian nationals, and Turkmen nationals, all recognised by Iraqi citizenship law.

In Morocco there are Arabs, Jews, and Imazighen (Berbers), three different nationalities.

In Germany most German citizens are of German nationality but there are also Sinti and Roma and Sorbs, Danes, and Frisians. Each have their own language and culture and are recognised as nations sharing German citizenship in Germany. (Jews are not recognised as a nation in Germany.)

In the United States there are US citizens of American nationality (your average American), non-citizens of American nationality (for example inhabitants of American Samoa or their descendants), and American citizens who are not American nationals but belong to a recognised Indian tribe.

Israel, the Jewish nation state, is as tied to Jewish nationality as Germany, the German nation-state, is to the German nationality. Although both countries have citizens of other nationalities.

1. Not all individuals of German nationality are German citizens. (For example there are individuals of German nationality who live in Russia. They could immigrate to Germany and get German citizenship on account of their German nationality.)

2. Not all German citizens are of German nationality. (For example the Sorbs, a slavic people, are German citizens but of Sorbian nationality. Please don't confuse them with Serbs or Serbia.)

1. Not all individuals of Jewish nationality are Israeli citizens. (For example American Jews or European Jews might not have Israeli citizenship. But they could immigrate to Israel and get Israeli citizenship on account of their Jewish nationality.)

2. Not all Israeli citizens are of Jewish nationality. (For example the Negev and Galil Bedouins are of Arab nationality but became Israeli citizens in 1952 (technically in 1948 but because of war and discriminatory practices it took years to get the ID cards and passports printed).

None of this has anything to do with race. If a man from Africa (who is black) becomes a German citizen he will also acquire German nationality and the result will be a black man of German nationality. An Ethiopian Jew is black but of Jewish nationality. A Negev Bedouin is white but not of Jewish nationality. (Although some Bedouins are Jewish but that's another subject.) An Ethiopian non-Jew is black but not of Jewish nationality (but belongs to one of the many Semitic and Cushitic peoples who live in Ethiopia).

 

MLK's point was not that you shouldn't recognise the achievements of a nation or group but that such achievements have nothing to do with their skin colour.

 

Those events are not unrelated and it makes no sense to see them in isolation.

I can learn from the experiences of my ancestors and because I did I knew how to handle these situations. I can celebrate the fact that they survived as I hope that later generations will celebrate the fact that I survived.

Heck, Americans celebrate Thanks-Giving. Is that not a national holiday that celebrates the (perceived) achievements of your nation? What about Independence Day? Are you George Washington? Probably not. But can you celebrate his victory because it is also yours? I would say so. What about Labour day? Celebrate the achievements of the American labour movement? Why not?

Every nation has its national holidays that remind individuals of the achievements of the nation. I don't get why this is wrong when Jews do it. Or do you think it is wrong to celebrate Independence Day?

 

Wrong, I'm thinking of the definition you gave. "People" as in plural is simply a term used to denote a group of persons characterized by one or more common attributes. I am simply asking you to tell me *which* attributes are necessary and sufficient to determine whether somebody is jewish or not. Handwaving the whole issue with a "you should know already" is simply useless.

Nothing is unrelated, yet we try to see and judge events in isolation all the time in an attempt to be more impartial as no single human can hold the entirety of humanity's circumstances throughout the ages in his head. You'd say that the jewish-ness or lackthereof of those involved was the most relevant factor, I'd say it was the geopolitical situation of the time and as such would be best to relate them to other contemporary events rather than tying two events separated by hundreds of years between them.

No, every *country* has its national holidays that remind individuals of the achievements of their *predecessors*, I don't celebrate the day "we" won "our" freedom, I celebrate the fact that I'm free because others fought and died for it and I'm grateful to them for doing so. There are many subtle differences between both, but very important ones as well.

And BTW, while I'm American by virtue of having been born on the American continent, I have never been to the United States, have nothing to do with it or its people, and as such have no reason to celebrate either Thanksgiving or George Washington's military victories. Also, as far as I know the US' Thanksgiving day celebrates the day the native American tribes gave the English colonizers food to help them survive through the winter and, as such, can hardly be considered an "achievement".

 

You seemed to have an issue with the concept of a nation as such.

I didn't know you wanted to know specifically about Jewish legal clarifications of nationality.

Jewish is anyone who has a Jewish mother or has converted to the Jewish religion.

Does that answer the question?

 

I didn't mean you specifically. I chose the US as an example because I figured you would at least know the country.

If anything else is unclear about the meanings of nation or nationality, return here and ask.