Jump to content

Talk:Kahanism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 June 2022

[edit]

Concerned about this bit:

"the majority of Arabs living in Israel are enemies of Jews and Israel itself"

As far as I know, Meir Kahane made it very clear that every Arab (not just most Arabs) are fundementally the enemies of the Jewish state and advocated for the expulsion of Arabs in general, not just the Arabs that could be considered "unloyal". HistoryResearcher101 (talk) 17:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I meant remove "the majority of" in this part:
Kahane maintained the view that the majority of Arabs living in Israel are enemies of Jews and Israel itself HistoryResearcher101 (talk) 20:15, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorist Organization

[edit]

I think the sentence about the US Classifying Kach as a terror organization should be removed, since that was revoked earlier this year. Mr manor11 (talk) 08:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It should be amended. It has been un-blacklisted because they have simply been inactive, but it remains a 'specially designated global terrorist' entity. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:51, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Iskandar323, IRL, I validate sanctions solutions providers to U.S. commercial and retail banks for AML/BSA and KYC compliance required by FinCEN & OFAC. Lists of SDFNs (specially designated foreign nationals) and entities that are deemed "terrorist organizations" can change often, and more so since sanctions on Russia as of 2022. State Dept. has a watchlist. Treasury has multiple watchlists. State and Treasury don't match 1:1 nor are they each unique. Anyway, entities (individuals and organizations) can be removed, or "un-blacklisted" from watchlists as appropriate by the US government, e.g. due to inactivity because all members are dead. Yet some old, inactive entities, e.g. Bader-Meinhoff group, Japanese sarin gas terrorists (forgot their name) are still on lists. How can an organization, e.g. Kach, remain a Specially Designated Terrorist group without remaining on the watchlist? Being an SDFN or SDT is what puts them on the watchlist, no? If they are deemed inactive, then they would be removed, I would think. Can you or another editor explain?--FeralOink (talk) 06:34, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is simply the state of affairs per US statements. See this article. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Iskandar323, I understand now, after re-reading my own comment! There are many idiosyncrasies in the U.S. terrorist watchlists. Thank you for providing that helpful link in your reply.--FeralOink (talk) 10:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FeralOink: @Iskandar323: Hey there, here is a reference you both may appreciate: "In May 2022, just after Israel’s thirty-sixth government lost its majority,[214] and early polling pointed to its impending demise,[215] the US State Department announced that it no longer considered the Kahanist group Kahane Chai to be a terrorist organization.[216] The move sent a clear signal to Netanyahu that US President Joe Biden did not object to his including the Kahanists in any future government."
David Sheen: Kahanism and American Politics: The Democratic Party's Decades-Long Courtship of Racist Fanatics, 2023 - Cheers --91.54.3.231 (talk) 22:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 November 2023

[edit]

add {{Fascism sidebar}} Gorgonopsi (talk) 08:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://imeu.org/article/fact-sheet-meir-kahane-the-extremist-kahanist-movement
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0031322X.1985.9969820 Gorgonopsi (talk) 08:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. While the fascism portal is already present on this page, the sidebar is far more visible and so editors may have WP:WEIGHT concerns regarding it's inclusion. —Sirdog (talk) 04:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. I think that like the title of your second source puts it, quisi-facism. If we start labeling every Far-right and Racist group of people fascist, the term loses all of its original political and historical meaning.
Honestly, Kahanist should be called Jewish supremacists, Jewish terrorists, Jewish racists or something to that effect because they don't hold political power, and they seem to be pushed by a theology based rhetoric with a group cohesive modeled after USA black panther groups which in the cases of Kahanist turned into racism.
So no, using the term fascism is both a bad describer and leads us farther down the modern day road were we label everything far right as fascism thereby cheapening that very real and academically defined ideological label.

Edit: I forgot I was gonna end with a statement that if we stretch the definition of fascism, technically, we should be relabeling a lot of governments and organizations as fascist, not the least of which would be the Hamas and Taliban government's.

[Haaretz article about Kahan]
[Fascism had no ideology]
RCSCott91 (talk) 02:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Text Source needed and possible rewording.

[edit]

"The party, and the Kahanist movement as a whole, have been described as espousing Jewish fascism."

"Netanyahu's hard-line new government takes office in Israel". BBC News

"Israel moves sharply to right as Netanyahu forms new coalition". BBC News

Neither source makes reference to the Kahanist or fascism, as somebody who remembers the terrorist attack in Hebron at the Ibrahim mosque at the Tomb of the patriarchs, this statement is most likely factual. Although, going through nearly all the web available references, I cannot find reference to any Kahanist descriptions with Jewish fascism.

Having said that, the above excerpt needs a source supporting it and the statement should be reworded so as not to sound like a bandwagon fallacy statement. RCSCott91 (talk) 15:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 September 2024

[edit]

Kahane proposed that the State of Israel should enforce Jewish law, as codified by Maimonides,[22]

Change to,

Kahane proposed that the State of Israel should adopt Jewish law. Use in line source the Meir interview, it's listed as source 1 in article but working link is at bottom.

Change reason:

The current in line source is the chapter six of kings, Mishnah Torah, which has nothing to do with the original assertion. Technically, you could make reference to Maimonides', "guide for the perplexed" but based on Meir Kahane's interview, listed in article as source 1, source down below, Kahane does not take Maimonides' requirements of a resident alien of Israel nor the rights granted to them.

Maimonides only requiring them follow the 7 noahide laws whereas Kahane requiring them to follow Halacha which is the entirety of religious Jewish law which is supposed to only be binding to Jewish people. Ger toshav being Maimonides' concept and Kahane concept being different based on his interview. Kahane makes it clear he wants Israel to adopt Jewish law, which would make enforcement pretty impossible without first adopting the laws.

https://web.archive.org/web/20020612060815/http://www.kahane.org/meir/interview.htm

RCSCott91 (talk) 02:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC) RCSCott91 (talk) 02:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the direct citation to Mishnah Torah. This article needs work, but in the past it has had problems with POV-pushing. I'm not sure that Kahane was consistent on this issue. In "They Must Go", he does (claim to) cite Maimonides on the status of non-Jews in Israel, including for a requirement that they obey the Noahide laws and accept servitude and a total absence of political rights. Zerotalk 03:46, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Kahane proposed that the State of Israel should enforce Jewish law, as codified by Maimonides,"

Change to,

"Kahane proposed that the State of Israel should enact his interpretation of Halacha,"

Reason: This falls both in line with his books, his interviews, and is proper verb use since Israel currently does not have Jewish law. It also doesn't make a sweeping statement about Jewish law, which Kahane much more often refers to by the proper term Halacha, the bulk of which being a collective set of legal arguments.

Although, Kahane references Rambam a lot, he references a lot of the sages in his books. Leaving that possible remnant of Kahane's interpretation of Maimonides' from an earlier edit in such an authoritative statement would lead a reader to believe that Maimonides' held those views/rulings.

The below book source, fully covers Kahane 3 options for non-Jews in Israel as an inline source.

https://archive.org/details/uncomfortable-questions-for-comfortable-jews-nodrm
RCSCott91 (talk) 14:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]