Author Topic: History: How the Israeli left defeated and excluded the right wing  (Read 2104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Madeline

  • Full JTFer
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
A friend sent me this paper which shows how the socialists in Israel suppressed the contributions of other groups, groups that fought and died for Israel's freedom.  And then, how all the 'greats' in the Israeli pantheon unscrupulously controlled the political process to keep out true Zionism.  Since I've always wondered about this process, I found the history and the time lines helpful, event though the paper is long and has many spelling and grammatical errors.  I think you will find it valuable too.

******************************************************

Udi Lebel
The Road to the Pantheon,
Etzel, Lehi and the Borders of Israeli National Memory
2007


Gate One

Right after the War of Indepdence, Mapai went to work creating a 'national memory'. The soldiers of Etzel and Lehi were not to be included in the national memory, they were to remain without names; they were not to be part of those whose sacrifice created the State of Israel. They no longer existed.

National memory is a creation, a myth, with little connection to truth. It is a result of 'who is in, who is out, who shall be remember as fathers of the nation and who shall be a villain or forgotten, which battles will be included in school hikes and tours, whose memoirs shall  be published and used as part of the school curriculum. Whose monuments shall be national treasures and symbols of the nation, at whose graves shall soldiers stand at attention at national memorial days, which families shall be recognized as worthy of a pension and who shall be pushed away.

Politics controls the people by entering the culture, the ceremonial and even the graves.

As soon as the State was declared david ben gurion went to work establishing the 'official' version of events.

Al that was done was done to give Mapai the legitimacy to control history and rule the State. Everything was done to erase the Irgun and Lehi, the battles they fought in were erased, their dead and wounded not recognized as victims of war, they were not mentioned in official memories; they were left out of all books.

All that was done was with the aim of establishing political-cultural hegemony. It succeeded exceptionally well, until 1977. The myths however, became 'national memory'. Only now a few are wiling to speak up and challenge the 'official version' that ben gurion created.

The Spirit of the Times

This is often seen as an independent force, a 'non-variable', in fact, it is a creation. The Spirit of the Times or the 'Zeitgeist' is created by those in power. The population believes it is they who created it and the politicians who are catering to it. Research indicates that the reverses is true. In Israel, collective memory and the zeitgeist was created by Mapai.

National Memory

National memory is the creation of 'official memory'. It is transmitted into public awareness through the press, national monuments, national ceremonies, law suits and survivors claims, national law, school books and national archives. (Scholars use the national archives for their research, but what they find is pre-determined as only pre-approved material enters the archives)

Lebel points out that 'nothing is random'. "Many do not know the discussions that took place behind closed curtains with regard to establishing myths at various memory centers – whether it be names of streets, official school programs, national monuments etc." This is all part of rational politics, every step is calculated in terms of loss and gain. It is always, 'the past in service of the present'.

The Party in power creates a hegemony by matching itself with the Spirit of the Times (which it creates). This hegemony is not only political, but cultural and social. The Party must be identified with the morals and values of the times, not only with political power. They must be seen as the natural party to lead the nation. They are the Spirit of the Times. The Party must be seen not only a victors in the elections but as the Party for whom "it is only natural to lead, and this is not an issue with can be disputed." "In this game, which is a cognitive process, not only the ruled, but also the rulers, becomes prisoners of the process. Both se the elite as committed to the welfare of the public." (Page 29) A consensus is thus created, the thought process is totally controlled.

"Culture is a creation of the dominant political establishment that works at creating a certain reality and dictates a certain pattern of behavior and knowledge that soon becomes taken for granted."

"The Spirit of the Times is not an objective variable but rather a subjective product of political manipulation, political engineering, if you will, rational and calculated." (Page 31) It is designed with long term goals, based on political interests so that in its framework the party will be seen as legitimate.

The Past in Service of the Future

Correctly 'interpreting' the past, spreading this interpretation and wide acceptance of it, is essential to establishing public opinion. Most current political heroes are seen as having roots in the past; control the past and you control the future. It is crucial that the official interpretations be accepted as undisputable public ethos, part of collective memory that no one would argue with. When a party comes to power they must gain control of the means of distributing information, mainly in terms of education and research and access to relevant research data. The official package of information must penetrate the 'collective past' to the point that it becomes part of the cultural identity, assumed, taken for granted, undisputed fact.

Eventually anyone who thinks otherwise would be regarded as some sort of 'conspiracy theory freak'.


This collective memory becomes the glue that creates a society. Now they have shared memories and a common purpose. "Nationalism is not just what you remember; it is also what you forget". One such example is the massacre of the Huguenots by the French Catholics on the night St. Bartholomew; this was deleted from French history books in order not to interfere with forming a national unity. Such 'divisive' facts do not serve the national purpose. Such facts soon 'no longer happened'.

The importance of the national collective memory is testified to by the enormous efforts put into shaping the network of national symbols, national myths and ceremonies that form a national civil culture. It is equally important, when creating the 'official record of events' to decide which groups or individuals will be chosen to be included in the category of 'fathers and founders of the nation', naturally these chosen will later have a natural claim to demand a preferred political status based on this 'accepted history.'

Some see the past as an independent entity without any necessary political relevance. That the collective memory is a product of people's actual memories and we must sift through it and then we can get to the truth. This is naïve. The entire history of national liberation movements is made up by a controlling elite as a source of political legitimacy.  "The history that becomes the national ideology and knowledge of the Nation, State or Movement is not what was actually preserved in national memory, but what was CHOSEN, SELECTED, WRITEN, PAINTED, DISTRIBUTED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED by THOSE WHOM IT WAS their job." (34-35) 

Nothing is left to chance. The past, the mythos, the leaders, the legends must be carefully chosen in order to produce the correct desired results. In Israel it led to decades of domination by the Mapai Party; political and cultural. In fact, with only a few cracks, it is mostly in tact.

National memory is not something that spring from the "bottom" but something that is created from the "top". Researchers feel that the public has lost its ability to 'remember' the past in a spontaneous natural way as part of its daily living. Rather it is spoon fed the 'past' through official channels.

Building national memory is done is three stages; Filtering (Selection), Interpretation, and distribution. It is a political process in its entirety.

In the first stage, a team is appointed with clear guide lines to choose events and people that fit into the image to be created. Special attention is to paid to examples that will inspire and motivate the youth. The chosen heroes become part of the Pantheon; the others are villains or struck from memory.

In the second stage, nothing may be left to the independent interpretation of the masses. History is packaged, events are correctly tied together, events are labeled as important or not, some battles go through a process known as "Heroezation"; even if they were irrelevant battles that might be deemed important politically, so they are 'spruced up' and become 'key battles in the battle for freedom'.

The third stage is distribution. This is easy since by now you should control all national resources; invite select groups to national ceremonies, honor certain people, bring school children to official tours, create 'social dialogue'. "As Young writes in his book ' The Texture of Memory'  "The memory is not created in a vacuum: it's motives are never pure.""

The French philosopher M. Foucault writes in 1973 that there is "a need, a challenge to expose the history of the forgotten." (The Order of Things, 1973)

What is a mythos? A story of events that is treated as 'Sacred" and is not an objective telling of events or historical truths, it is a subjective truth without supporting facts, it is marketed to 'consumers' outside the realm of power.. The myths always support the existing political order. Myths can never die, they can only be removed after a long political struggle over political hegemony, they will then be replaced by a competing myth. Only those on the outside can ever see the myth for what it is, those on the inside can not see it. Only those on the outside can expose the myth and show the truth, if the truth is even known. (page 38)

Since the dawn of history the political, ruling, elite have created myths around the story of their rise to power in order to provide legitimacy to their rule. If in the past these stories involved using Divine power, today the myths are largely secular. The myth becomes folklore, folklore replaces reality.

Once the myth strikes roots – the invention, the distortion of reality, the erasing of historical truths no longer have the ability to diminish the power the myth to arouse emotions and inspire loyalty in the target audience.

Common knowledge in political science is that ruling parties focus on the present in order to survive politically in the future, this model ignores how the past is used to protect their domination in the future.

Politics and Mourning

One might think that the "Kehilla of the dead" is outside the range of politics. Grief, in fact, is a political factor of the highest order. The ruling elite use them as an asset and deprives them of their identity as individual, private, people.

The ruling elite must decide: When does collective national memory begin? (at what date), who will be included as heroes who died for the nation? (i.e. part of the myth), which events shall be included?  This is an excellent way to eliminate competing players and their life works and sacrifice. There is no such thing as undisputed objective history; everything is subject to a political decision. Any year can be chosen as being the first year of the struggle.

Anyone who died before the chosen "first year" , will of course not be recognized as official victims. They will not get survival rights, they will not be included in national monuments or ceremonies.

What must be done is to take the grief and mourning away from the 'individual, emotional' and incorporate it effectively into the long term political goals. This must be recognized as a major political asset not to be squandered on individual or family mourning. Grief must is used as carefully calculated, thought out policy, derived entirely from political considerations. This is why bodies are not left in the field, this is why there are national cemeteries for recognized fallen soldiers, this is why the government pays for these services and for monuments and ceremonies.

At first this may appear as having been motivated by humanistic concerns for the fallen soldiers and their families, quickly it becomes clear that this is not a "one sided" gesture. The ruling party exacts a price in return for these services (burial, graves etc). This price is exacted by removing the fallen from the private sector and making them national symbols which the State will use endlessly, shamelessly, in the form of propaganda, communication, and media.

National military cemeteries are sites where memory is rebuilt for the purpose of transmitting clear political messages, mostly subtle, practically hidden. Two main functions are served. The first; an intensive penetration of the memory of the fallen heroes into national collective memory. This is why monuments are built all over the country. The second function is to establish 'who is in and who is out'. Whosever fallen are not included in the national cemetery, has no claim to national power and lacks a main political asset.

National cemeteries express, more than any place else, collective values of sacrifice and obedience to the State, thus they have a great ability to motivate young people to follow in this path, and to support the current leaders. Those who died as a result of accidents, in a failed mission, or in defeat – embarrass the elite and although buried in the national cemetery, are absent from the myth. Only after many efforts from grassroots movements, will these people, despite the opposition of the elite, be remembered as heroes as well.

The State has a 'barter' arrangement with the bereaved families.  The State raises them to levels of national heroes; the families get compensated financially and emotionally. The families are helped to recover economically and are also enabled to better cope with their loss, since their fallen are recognized as official heroes.

The families must take upon themselves "The political behavior of grief", which the State prefers. They offer political legitimacy to the chosen leaders and will accept certain roles. Often the bereaved will mingle with the social elite, be seen at national ceremonies and will be active in promoting the "legacy" of their children, such as "in their death they commanded us to continue to give, to sacrifice". Of course this "legacy" or dying wish is formulated by the elite and has nothing to do with any thing said or believed by the deceased. The 'legacy' is formulated by paid political 'interpreters'. Politically, parents of fallen are to encourage the youth to enlist and serve the same 'national goals' that there sons fought and died for.

 As Yigal Yadin said in 1951, "They gave us our independence, left us a legacy of bravery, a willingness to sacrifice and a passionate faith. The 'command'  that they left us, these victims of independence, is to sacrifice everything for the independence of Israel."


Personal note: (by me, not by author)
The evil here is that the legitimate voice of the fallen is taken away. Perhaps if they could speak they would say things like, "I died in an ill conceived battle'", or "This battle was not important for the independence of Israel but just to achieve some narrow political goal", or, "to cover the blundering of some commander", or "To advance the career of some officer", or "We were not prepared for this battle and should not have pursued it."

I.e. while the goal of indepdence might be worthwhile, the 'official' statements and using the of the dead, erases any legitimate complaints, and removes blame and criticism from the leaders.

Just as victims of terror become "victims of peace" and thus the blundering leaders change the facts from "They died as a result of our incompetence" to "They died as inevitable sacrifices on the road to a great peace", the dead, who can no longer speak, are used to justify all sorts of mistakes. Their individuality is removed when they become property of the State (in exchange for hero status and benefits to the family). What if the family would say, "Our son was not suited to be a soldier, it was a mistake to take him to battle, his death was unnecessary and served no purpose!" This sort of thing would not serve national interests, would not look good for the leaders who sent this boy and others like him, to war. As Udi Lebel writes, it is a barter agreement; we will make your son a hero, we will say he died defending our people, you will be compensated and you will be invited to a ceremony, you will shake hands with the president, and, you will only say what we tell you to say.

How many died needlessly? Which wars could have been avoided? We may never know. As Rudyard Kipling wrote so many years ago, "Mine is not to question why, mine is just to do and die", I believe what Lebel is telling us is that now it is time to "question why" before we send any more to "do and die".

We now can see that all these official memorial ceremonies are to justify the deaths (Vietnam, Korea, Lebanon, Iraq) and quiet the public, rather than a sincere effort to 'honor' anyone. It is a mocking of the public and a "shameless political use of the community of the dead".

Back to the book.

Strategies,
After establishing the official history, determining who is in and who is out etc, the message must be spread to all levels of society. Since you are control society this next step is not difficult. Use your resources: National memorial centers, national ceremonies, postage stamps, names of streets, towns and neighborhoods, national holidays, educational programs; all these must be used to penetrate the myth to the daily lives of the people.
   
'Moreshet Krav' – (Battle Legacy) Every Israeli soldier is imbued with the lessons of past battles by learning 'Moreshet Krav", but as Mordechai Bar On points out, Moreshet Krav was never intended to be a collection of battle lessons or an analysis of combat. Rather its purpose was to "Use battles to teach certain values; morale, unit pride, loyalty to the army, willingness to sacrifice, solidarity."
Bar-On points out that it is a process of 'Selective memory'. "Only those memories which contribute to the desired result are chosen." Bar-On says it is not just a process of selective memory but also of programmed forgetting. What is created is a secular religion, what is being worshiped is not God but State and society. This process first began in England following the heavy losses of World War One. It was seen as helping the public cope with the losses.

In Israel the process of memorial is described as coming from 'below' (grassroots movements), but this ignores the fact that behind this was a clear political agenda controlled and manipulated from 'above'. Certain grassroots movements were rebuffed and did not get a chance to participate in this 'spontaneous' movement.

Memorial days are a type of political symbol. They are an opportunity to transmit political messages and values. That is why money is spent on them, that is why politicians show up to speak. Traffic arrangements are altered to that people can come and hear these political messages, TV programs are changed, all so as many people as possible can learn the correct version of the national past. These things are repeated year after year; the heroes, the stories, so that the hold on the people becomes stronger and stronger.

Cultural Manipulation

Max Weber points out that the significance of Memory is that the current powers lean on it for legitimacy. In other words, they lean not on their current accomplishments, not on success in economics, security, or industry, not on the present, but on the past. The sacrifice of the past is their Gold Stocks; forget the present, remember the past. That is why the past must be carefully controlled and transmitted. The current accomplishments are too weak to hold the people.

The present is open to political competition, the past is not. And how can any political competition dare criticize or challenge those whose past efforts created the State!

Weber points out the importance of using theater, education, newspapers, all media to deligitemize the opposition and paint them as social deviants.

Example of historical facts which need to be forgotten, david ben gurion and Yitachak Ben Tzvi (2nd president of Israel, a Labor man) both served in Jabotinsky's Jewish legion, as privates under Jabotinsky. 

Mapai was formed in 1930, it took control of the labor unions and from the start there was never equality among its members. "Protectzia" was the rule from the very beginning. This was not a system that became corrupt, it was founded exactly on such principles. The Hisdatrut controlled everything from the beginning and all the 'benevolent' social welfare organizations were nothing but another means of controlling the population. 'Shikun' to supply housing, Bank HaPoalim, employment offices etc, Mapai had complete control over every aspect of the people's lives. To enjoy these benefits one had to be a member of the party.

1920's – Ben gurion suggests to centralize control and come to complete ownership of the means of production and direct control of the entire population.
1932 – 1935:  Of 77 Mapai meetings, 46 are devoted to the fight against the Revisionists.
1930 – Betar and the Revisionist quit the Histadrut
1931 – Betar quits the Hagana (founded by Jabotinsky)
1932 – Eliyahu Golumb of Labor says, 'We do not promise universal benefits to all Jews, only to Mapai members'.
1933 – Mordechai Namir (Namirovsky) identifies Jabotinsky with Hitler. "The Jewish disciples of Hitler are raising their head in the Jewish street" (HaPoel HaTzair, April 1933)
1934 – Jabotinsky founds a competing labor union.
1935 – Jabotinsky and the Revisionists quit the Zionist movement. He founds the New Zionist Organization. Mapai would control Israeli politics totally until 1977.

After the unsolved murder of Arlozoruv in 1933 there were many among Mapai who wanted to use physical violence against the Revisionists. Shlomo Lavie wanted to use the British Mandate to 'physically dismantle the Revisionist party. Eliyahu Golumb wanted to pin the murder on the entire Revisionist party and then eliminate the party for good. (Mapai meeting, June 20, 1933), He wanted to show the Revisionists were training murderers.

No one was ever convicted in a court of law, but on the streets the Revisionist were treated as guilty.  Many years later the Revisionists accused Mapai of a blood libel.

Ben Gurion (BG) believed in 'the elite creates the nation'. Nothing symbolized this more than the Palmach; it's members lived and trained in the kibbutzim and accepted unconditionally the authority and values of the Yishuv. In 1948, however, it became known to ben gurion that most of the commanders of the Palmach supported the opposition labor party, Mapam, and thus he dismantled the Palmach forever.

From the early days all government and military appointments were based by BG on political loyalty to him personally. For example, Yaakov Dori was Chief of Staff but was sick during the entire War of Independence, none-the-less he kept his job, while the person who filled in during the war, Yisrael Galili, was dropped because he was of the wrong political bent. "It could be generalized that most of the changes and appointments had a political basis and not a military or professional basis, according to his (BG) system, political calculations, even in strictly professional positions, were permitted as they expressed the national interest." (Page 75)

Betar splits with Hagana over the fact that in 1929 the Hagana failed to protect Jews. It forms 'Irgun Bet', which becomes Etzel. Etzel drops the Hagana policy of "Havlaga" (Restraint against the Arabs)

1940 – Avraham Stern splits with the Irgun and founds his own group, this was known as "The Stern Gang", in 1942, under Yitzchak Shamir it became known as Lehi – FFI – Freedom Fighters for Israel.
February 1942 – Avraham Stern (Code name Yair) murdered by the British after his arrest in Tel Aviv.

1942 – Menachem Begin makes aliya from Poland
1943 – Begin named as commander of Etzel
February 1, 1944 – Begin declares open rebellion against the British.

The Jerusalem area was a problem for BG, as he wrote in his memoirs, "Etzel supporters in Jerusalem are the Neturei Karta people in Mea Shearim, Geula and Bet Yisrael, also Mahane Yehuda and Nahalot, Nahalat Zion (Sephardim), Nahalat Achim (Yemenite), Zichron Y osef (Kurds) and the Bucharim Neighborhood."
He also noted, again and again, that the Irgun had much support about the Sephardic/North African community.
 
It was decided to start a smear campaign against the Irgun, as they were gaining in popularity among the youth. They were be depicted not as fighting for the national cause but as a threat to the national interest.

Lehi depicted the Zionist leadership as a group of elderly 'Shnurers' and political hacks, subject to the British.

When Palmach members asked the Zionist leadership why they must fight their Jewish brothers (Irgun, Lehi) they were told that these groups were classified as "Mored ba Malchut" (Halachic term, rebelling against the king) and must be "eliminated". Many Palmach members had grave reservations about fighting for political purposes against fellow Jews. The Zionist leadership responded with a campaign to dehumanize the opposition; they are deviants, social misfits, criminal types, crazy gangs, and so forth.

The youth was captivated with Lehi and saw them as heroes in Biblical proportions. Two leading members of Mapai had a radical idea; they suggested to 'physically eliminate the members of Lehi' .

Who were these crazed Mapai members?
The answer may shock you

They were Golda Meyerson and Zalman Robushuv; later know as Prime Minister Golda Meir, and third Israeli president Zalman Shazar. (Mapai archives, political council, March 27, 1944, information became public in 1995)

(These are your 'gods' O Israel, the Pantheon, The Temple of the gods)

The self sacrifice, bravery, courage and success of Lehi astounded everyone, the Zionist leadership and the British feared a mass flow of youth to their ranks, they became super heroes. Lehi members who were captured used the court house as a platform to give great speeches which further excited the youth. In a private meeting at the United Kibutz movement it was stated, "It is very difficult for our people to hold their ground in arguments with Lehi members,…we are facing an ideological problem here." Haim Wiezman was shocked at this development and was very worried. (February 1945)

They met with Begin and asked him nicely to put an end to all this, he would not budge.

October 19, 1944 – Eliyahu Golumb declares war against the 'terrorist' movements in Ertez Yisrael. (Davar newspaper)

November 6, 1944, Lehi members murder Lord Moyne in Cairo.
Although Lehi did most of the actions which the Zionist leadership condemned, it was the IRGUN alone that was attacked. Why? Because Lehi had no political party or political aspirations, they were never a threat to Mapai, while the Irgun had a party and political aspirations. It was not that they really believed that the Irgun and Lehi were harming the national liberation cause (as is presented in all history books) and that for the sake of establishing the State of Israel the painful decision was taken to fight those groups (Irgun, Lehi) but rather it was only future political concerns about political leadership that motivated the season and all the actions against the Irgun. On this point the entire population of pre State (and post Statehood) Israel deliberately deceived.  Brothers fought brothers, unknowingly, because of the political aspirations of BG and his gang.

November 20, 1944 – BG meets with the Histadrut and lays out the plan for the war against the 'terrorists'. The Season is openly declared.  250 top Palmach members were assigned to start the hunting season. Menachem Begin responded by saying "Jew shall not fight Jew, there shall be no Civil War", this was called "Havlaga", Begin would not fight back. Hundreds of Irgun members were tortured in kibbutzim, or turned over to the British.

Yigal Alon and many Palmach members opposed all this. Alon, in fact, resigned from his position on this operation.  Other Palmach members acted with great cruelty as they wanted to prove their loyalty to their leaders. At the same time a secret agreement was made between the Hagana and Lehi; in exchange for Lehi stopping their military actions, the Palmach would spare them during the Season. This, again, despite the fact that the actions which led to the Season were done by Lehi and not the Irgun, again, the true reason is clear; the whole thing was politically motivated, Irgun was a political threat while Lehi was not, thus, Lehi could be spared. BG said to Yaakov Riftin, "It does not matter who is guilty, what matters is which organization is the greater threat." (heard by Moshe Sneh and Eliyahu Golumb)

October 1945 – July 1946 – Cooperation between the three underground movements. With the bombing of the King David Hotel (July 1946) this agreement came to an end.

November 29, 1947 – UN partitions Eretz Yisrael, the British begin to leave.

April 1948, Etzel agrees to fight as an independent unit but subject to the leadership of Hagana.
April 22, 1948 – Etzel (Irgun) come out of the underground, 600 fighters and hundreds of members wear the Irgun symbol openly for the first time. They join the Hagana in the conquest of Yaffo.
June 1, 1948, Menachem Begin and Yisrael Galili sign an agreement; the Irgun will join the IDF and serve in separate units. This applies only to areas under Israeli control. In Jerusalem the Irgun remains independent.
June 15, 1948 – Herut, political party, established.

Building the Power  - BG Things Ahead.

BG, before the establishment of the State, starting dismantling the pre-State organizations, which he controlled, and replacing them with 'National' organizations that would appear non-political. Of course he placed his people in all key positions. This clever plan was designed so that with the establishment of the state all 'state' organizations would already be in place and he would have complete control over them. Had he not dismantled his pre-state organizations, there would now have to be elections and open competition for these positions. Now, all that was pre-settled.

BG de-legitimized his political opponents, controlled the means of production, took complete control over law and order, and demanded unconditional loyalty to the State and its institutions. He made his will, 'national will', and ignored all other voices. Only Mapai represented the will of the people, all other parties were pursuing private selfish interests.

Even people who affiliated with the rival secular/labor party, Mapam, were excluded from all positions. Yisrael Galili, the entire Palmach (dismantled) BG said that Mapam was too close ideologically to the Soviet Union and therefore it's members were no longer trustworthy to serve in the new State. The former glorious unit of the Palmach was dismantled and labeled potentially subversive.

Rewriting the Past

The contributions of Irgun and Lehi shall be erased, BG shall be presented as father of the nation and leader of the revolution.

Twenty years would pass before Jabotinsky's bones were to be allowed to be buried in Israel. This was only possible, of course, once BG was no longer head of Mapai.




Gate Two

BG set the official date for the beginning of the war of Independence in such a way so as to deliberately exclude the Irgun and Lehi casualties from official recognition and survival benefits. Not only that but even those who fought after the official start of the war were excluded as not having met the official criteria of being enlisted men. Not only that but loop holes were found to include Hagana members who were killed or injured before the "official" start of the war.

Another loop hole to exclude Irgun and Lehi members was to state that the War of Independence was only against the Arabs, not against British. Since there was no war against the British, casualties incurred fighting the British – do not count.

One official document stated that any fighter, who was a casualty of a battle which somehow challenged the authority of Mapai, would not be recognized and would not be entitled to benefits. Anyone who served in "unrecognized movements" was not included. Al Hagana members were recognized.

Golda Meir fought bitterly against recognizing anyone who "was so arrogant as to recognize the national institutions." (December 30, 1952)
Golda Meir showed no sympathy to the families of the fallen who served with the Irgun and Lehi.
BG said that giving the crippled Irgun and Lehi members rights, or recognizing the families of the fallen, would serve to legitimize the past actions of these groups. Thus they would be recognized as contributing to the struggle for the State and would be entitled to a share in it. Therefore BG fought tooth and nail against equality. Only those Irgun members who fell in 'authorized' battles would be recognized. Even this small achievement took years of work.

After a long fight, the causalities of the Irgun and Lehi were included.

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581
Re: History: How the Israeli left defeated and excluded the right wing
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2008, 07:19:11 AM »
Fascinating.  I would love to read more of this work.  Is there more to the article or must I purchase the author's book?