Jump to content

Talk:Jewish exodus from the Muslim world

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

Quick Grammar error/Typo

[edit]

1. Could an authorised editor please make the following 2/1 character correction in the article lede? Sentence currently flips "direction" in its final third -- jarring for native English speakers. Thanks in advance.

NOW: "In total, of the 900,000 Jews who left Arab and other Muslim countries, 600,000 settled in the new state of Israel, and 300,000 immigrated to France and the United States."

BETTER AS: "~ 300,000 emigrated ~" Tom Segev's quote (footnote 300)

2. "if a man as well connected and powerful as Shafiq Ades could he eliminated by the state" - change "he" to "be"

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 February 2025

[edit]

Please change Jewish exodus from the Muslim world to Jewish exodus from the Muslim world The Nishul The DamGana Eloent (talk) 18:57, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I see nothing wrong with the original title. (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 21:07, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic Cleansing

[edit]

Clearly multiple programs of ethnic cleansing. Absurd this is labelled as "exodus" while nakba is labelled as ethnic cleansing, especially since MORE jews were kicked out and arab leaders promised this/genocide would happen during partition.

The fact the term "ethnic cleansing" isnt even mentioned ONCE in this article shows the deplorable state wikipedia is in, filled with already proven political bias of the lowest level. Hen.machiavelli (talk) 14:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if you want people to actually take this comment seriously, you should provide reliable sources calling this ethnic cleansing. Are there any historians you can quote on that? Blagai (talk) 18:32, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'm sure others will add more.
Georges Bensoussan, historian and editor of the Revue d'histoire de la Shoah: https://jewishjournal.com/wires/353108/forgotten-arabian-jews-recount-lives-of-happiness-and-horror
Tom Gross, Journalist and foreign correspondant: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-06-19/debates/F75D29CB-C4C8-447D-A028-1FA05CD3594D/JewishRefugeesFromTheMiddleEastAndNorthAfrica 74.57.24.26 (talk) 07:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Ella Shohat quoted in this article? She should be removed.

[edit]

There's a whole paragraph on a supposed "Zionist master narrative" of Sephardic Jews (note, even the use of this is incorrect, as it doesn't even cover the subject at hand, and her only reference point is an opinion piece from Haaretz from 1949 by Arye Gelblum, which in itself caused a major polemic, as you can read in his own wiki entry. https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94_%D7%92%D7%9C%D7%91%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%9D So why is Ella Shohat even quoted in this? 74.57.24.26 (talk) 06:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ella Shohat, the Background section and general bias in this article

[edit]

Ella Shohat’s perspective is unnecessary in the Background section of an article covering the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Muslim countries. Yes, ethnic cleansing.

The Background section should provide historical context relevant to the mass displacement and persecution faced by these Jewish communities, rather than pushing certain anti Zionist narratives that shift focus from the article. The issue with English, let alone Arabic Wikipedias stance on Zionism and the Arab-Israeli conflict is clear and it was obvious that this type of problem will appear here to.

Shohat’s inclusion in this section serves to reframe the discussion away from the systemic violence that led to the antisemitism faced by jews under Muslim rule. As a self described "Arab jew" with left leaning tendencies, she ofcorse will portray Zionism as an exclusively Ashkenazi (supposed White European movement) and Wikipedia will ignore the stories of millions of Non-Ashkenazi jews and push the myth of "co-existence" which never existed. Note that "Arab jew" is a rather modern political term used in anti-zionist circles. Jews neither used the term nor were they treated like arabs. This article is unbalanced. Either delete that part completely or include Jewish arguments in favor of the state of Israel. Editors have their own world views that they want to push and Wikipedia, as a supposedly "neutral" source, should ensure that no narrative pushing happens here. The Nakba article has everything, from how evil zionists (jews) are to "Nakba denial". There is a heavy effort to support the Palestinian Arab narrative on every single article slightly related to the Arab-Israel conflict. Why is the Nakba article so biased that one should ask how this could have happened, and why is this a pathetic attempt to overshadow Islamic colonialism and Islamic persecution?

  • Change the Title to "Ethnic cleansing of jews from the Muslim world"
  • Include actual history and the rise of antisemitism in Islamic society
  • Include incidents like the Farhud and all other Forced conversions, massacres and blood libels that occurred during the 19th and early 20th century
  • Less biased language with the portrayal of zionism as "evil" and Mizrahi/Sephardic jews as victims

Note that I didn't say that this should be a pro zionist article, but a certain degree of actual neutrality, even for an article like this, should be doable.

This comes from someone with Mizrahi roots. I've provided sources. I'm open for non biased discussions. Thanks AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 18:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing "irrelevant" or "biased" about the content you removed. It's directly relevant to Ashkenazi Jewish efforts to relocate Sephardim and Mizrahim out from the Muslim world. It's also well-documented that Ashkenazis were scornful of non-Ashkenazi Jews.[1][2][3] Skitash (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @إيان who was responsible for adding the content in question. Skitash (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read what I've wrote? Concentrating on certain policies of some Ashkenazi Jews while completely ignoring Mizrahi/Sephardic-Ashkenazi cooperation is textbook bias. Jewish efforts to relocate as many Jews as possible to Israel included Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, and other Jewish groups. Large scale evacuations from hostile Muslim countries took place and had to take place, especially from countries like Yemen. Jewish organizations connected to the British Mandate operated in every country with a significant Jewish population, facilitating immigration for Jews of all backgrounds. There were many Mizrahi Jews who were staunch Zionists, such as Eli Cohen and Eliyahu Hakim. I could list countless non-Ashkenazi Zionists whose contributions were crucial. Personal worldviews are irrelevant and do not belong in the background section, especially from those that identify as "Arab jews", a minority of a minority with a twisted world view that doesn't accept anything except what they believe in. Jews from Muslim countries weren't expelled because of some "Ashkenazi master plan", they were ethnically cleansed for being jews and because they didn't like that. Act accordingly and don't push narratives. The general mistrust between Ashkenazi and Mizrahi/Sephardi Jews was due to the fact that these diaspora groups lived in different regions, developing distinct values and worldviews. Jews saw arabs as the enemies that want to destroy their state, this fact improved mistrust against jews from those very countries that want them gone. Yet, portraying this as applying to all Ashkenazi Jews while ignoring anything that contradicts this narrative is, again, bias. You're also on practically every Jewish, Zionist and Israeli page which is interesting, but unsurprising, especially because you're one of many editors who openly oppose zionism. Clearly you and the person you've tagged have to do something to change our history. I repeat myself, her personal opinions are irrelevant and don't belong to the background section. I see the attempt to whitewash Jewish history under Muslim rule by only speaking about rather tolerant years. That the ottomans opened the doors for Sephardic jews is mentioned but the countless blood libels and deportations aren't, why is that? Why don’t you mention the massive waves of persecution against the Jews of Yemen, which worsened in pre-Zionist times? Why is there no mention of the massacres and forced conversions of Persian Jewry or Moroccan Jewry? Out of all the information available on Mizrahi history, you’ve chosen Ella Shohat’s perspective. AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 01:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's perfectly obvious that Shohat's perspective belongs in the article. She is one of the primary academic writers on the topic. Zerotalk 07:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiosity, are you guys reading what I'm writing? AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 08:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently not. Shohat’s perspective is irrelevant and most definitely doesn't belong to the background section. Ive said this multiple times and none of you explained why you want to include it there so bad. If you want to include it, move it to "view's on the exodus" section.
There are more than enough sources against the co-existence narrative you're trying to push. "Ottomans allowed jews in after the Europeans kicked them out" but for some reason you won't mention incidents like the deportation of jews to Cyprus, the Safed pogrom and countless blood libels. Morocco wasn't a nice place either. Jews were killed in taza in 1903. More in Casablanca and Settat in 1907. Further incidents took place in Rabat, 1933. I think that I don't have to mention how jews were treated in Yemen or how the Farhud and the general antisemitic atmosphere in iraq already forced a number of jews to flee. None of this is included and there are examples from every Muslim country. It's a mystery why none of you included this type of information and instead want Shohat’s opinion. AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 14:16, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Skitash
  • "So far, nobody has agreed with any of your changes on the TP."
Then answer.
As expected, you, again, reverted my edits that were backed by sources. None of you answered properly and explained why Shohat’s viewpoint has to be in the background section and why it shouldn't be there where every other opinion is listed. None of you included any antisemitic incidents. And there were alot. Instead we see the same behavior as on any Israel related pages.
  • ....As such, these groups were accorded certain rights as "People of the Book".
    • 1. Not always and you know it
    • 2. What would happen if a dhimmi stands up for himself in every possible scenario?
We both know the answer but for some reason this is not included.
  • ...Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula were invited to settle in various parts of the Ottoman Empire, where they would often form a prosperous model minority of merchants acting as intermediaries for their Muslim rulers.
  • And not only in the Ottoman empire, in almost all Muslim countries, there were all types of incidents, none of them mentioned.
And after this we have Shohat’s biased personal opinion, for some reason not in "views on the exodus" but directly next to a section that makes it look like everything was fine until the supposed white European colonizers arrived.
Looks like obvious narrative pushing to me.
Mind explaining why you decided to delete everything I've added, even though everything was backed up by sources?
Talking about how the Ashkenazim "destroyed our relationships with arabs" on one hand but on the other hand completely ignoring our history in the very same countries that kicked us out. Comical. AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 18:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The opinions of Avi Beker and Ada Aharoni should be treated the same way as Shohat’s point of view.
AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to your recent additions,
"as long they did not contest the inferior social and legal status imposed on them under Islamic rule" This cherry picked sentence is redundant. The linked article (Dhimmi) in the prior sentence accurately covers their status.
"In 1947, Jewish traders who lived in Peshawar folded up after antisemitic riots" What does this have to do with the subject of this article?
"Arguments on the TP have been ignored by certain editors." The WP:ONUS is not on them to achieve consensus. In fact, no editor has agreed with any of your changes, and more than one editor opposed your attempt to remove Shohat's perspective from the article. Skitash (talk) 23:24, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • That "cherry picked" sentence makes it clear that those "rights" weren't always granted. The status of the dhimmis was inferior to the Muslim population and it's important to mention this.
  • The Peshawar incident was caused by antisemitic sentiment connected to the first Arab-Israeli war and affected local jews. This article is about the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Muslim countries. Pakistan is a Muslim country and the Jewish community there doesn't exist anymore. I would add more incidents to other countries after this discussion is over.
  • I deleted it the first time because it doesn't belong to the background section. Last time, I moved it to "views on the exodus", together with the opinions of Avi beker and Adi Aharoni. Nobody explained why it's so important for you to include her opinion in the background section. I've mentioned this in every comment and still got no answer.
AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And @Skitash, I didn't "attack" you on your TP. You show a clear interest in the Israeli-Arab conflict, and your position on Zionism and related topics is obvious. You're entitled to your personal opinions, but neither you nor other editors should impose them on Wikipedia articles, which are meant to be neutral.
This is my view on the anti-Israel bias in English Wikipedia. You can't deny that some editors engage in editing activities that alter the Jewish narrative in favor of the Arab one. Six editors were banned from the topic for doing that. There have been changes on Jewish-related pages, especially after the October massacre. And I this case, I don't like how our history is portrayed here as if everything was fine until Ashkenazim came and "destroyed the co-existence" between jews and Muslims. It's simply not true. AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bro, you’re POV pushing with articles that are 20 years old. If you want to include these perspectives, you can make a historiography section in which you go chronologically through the history of the various narratives on the topic, but as far as I know, Shohat represents the most current academic consensus on the topic. إيان (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources were not credible? I want all perspectives to be treated equally and improve the neutrality of this article. Her opinion should be listed where all other opinions are, not in the background section. That section should include more information about the rise of antisemitism in Muslim countries and the incidents, both in pre-modern Zionist times and after the establishment of Israel, that contributed to the disappearance of Mizrahi Jews from their host countries. I see the placement of Shohat’s viewpoint as narrative pushing. AhmedElMohamedi (talk) 01:51, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jewish_exodus_from_the_Muslim_world&oldid=1281391514"