 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
Top importance? edit
I think this article should become high importance. While the Second Aliyah practically built the Yishuv, it's still not a core topic of Israel. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 17:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Role of Zionism edit
I don't understand the logic behind this sentence: "The Zionist ideology played a minor factor for Jewish emigration to Palestine as indicate by the proportionally small number of immigrants compared to those who went to the US." The only way this makes sense is if we assume all Jews to have been Zionists. Then we could rightly say that although there were (e.g.) 2 million Zionists who emigrated, only 50,000 came to Palestine, ergo Zionism played only a small role in the Second Aliya. But there is no way to know how many subscribed to Zionist ideology and of those, what percentage went to Palestine. Also, even if only 2.5% of Zionists went to Palestine, that doesn't mean that the ones who did go were NOT motived to a large extent by Zionism. I don't think any of this is more than speculation and move for the section to be removed unless a valid source can be cited to back it up. MosheEmes (talk) 01:41, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
I second MosheEmes's criticism (although I don't agree with his argument either, but that's moot). The argument in this section of the article appears illogical and is not attributed to any source. The question addressed in this section is:
- Did Zionism play a major role in the Second Aliyah? I.e. was Zionism a major motivation for those immigrants from Eastern Europe who chose to go to Palestine?
The evidence in the article addresses the question:
- Did Zionism play a major role in the mass exodus of Jews from Russia and Eastern Europe in the early 20th century?
The evidence in the article - that most of these immigrants chose the USA or other countries offering greater economic opportunity and less discrimination - suggests that Zionism played a small role in this exodus over all. But it doesn't answer what role it played for that small subset of immigrants who, against their economic best interests, chose to go to Palestine? There are other possible explanations for this decision (immigrants leaving Russia were misinformed about conditions in Palestine, the journey was easier, etc), but the article supports none of these. 123forman (talk) 17:07, 4 July 2014 (GMT)
I'm glad others noticed the inconsistency of this paragraph. Indeed, if anything the evidence provided in this section supports the idea that Zionism did play a role, since it points out that escape from poverty or persecution would not have been achieved by immigration to Palestine. I propose deleting the section and moving the background information provided there and in the introduction into a "Background" section. Hydroargenium (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Restructured to resolve this problem and generally increase clarity. Hydroargenium (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Too much ultra-Westernized POV in this restructuring.GreyShark (dibra) 14:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
This section is illogical, contains grammatical errors and appears to be an example of someone trying to push a personal view. The article would be best served if the sections was deleted entirely. Alan3278 (talk) 11:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- What you removed, apart from the short final paragraph, is supported by three academic sources written by respected experts. If it isn't a good reflection of the sources or is not written well, you should study the sources and improve the text according to what they say. It doesn't matter in the least whether you agree with it or consider it illogical. The role of Zionism in the second aliyah is now not mentioned at all, despite this obviously being a very important question. Zerotalk 03:51, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
I do not have access to the sources you quote but I have seen articles by one of the experts, Gur Alroey, and what he writes is much more nuanced than the view expressed in this section. The assertion that 'the role of Zionism in the second Aliyah is now not mentioned at all' is simply untrue. 86.26.64.65 (talk) 12:15, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
New Zionism section edit
A new section on Zionism was added, sourced to a paper which I'd like to get my hands on. Is this available anywhere online somewhere?
Currently the section repeats the same idea a few times, so it can be trimmed significantly, but I don't have access to the source. It also contradicts itself: it says that Zionism was not a major factor in the immigration to the Land of Israel, but at the same time people who did immigrate suffered economic hardships and persecution in Israel as well. It should probably read that Zionism was not a major factor in emigration from Eastern Europe, but the people who did choose to emigrate to Israel were Zionists—but again, I don't have access to the source and don't know exactly what it says on the subject.