The Romans under Theodosius I and Theodosius II:
a) banned interrmarriage between Christians and Jews
b) legally excluded them from serving in public offices- civilian and military.( exception was tax collection)
c) Made conversion to Judaism illegal.
Under Justinian the Byzantine Romans continued to legally ban the construction of new synagogues.
With the Ottomans, Jewish communities were expected to pay the jizya- a protection payment levied on a non-muslim for living in the Ottoman Empire.
Not to mention:
a. the Damascus affair of 1840
b. The 1828 Baghdad massacre of the Jews
c.1864 massacre of Jews in Marrakech and Fezin Morocco
d. Targeting of Jews in Libya between 1860 and 1897- where synagogues were ransacked and Jewish individuals killed.
On the Mamluks, they don't fair any better especially as the state over time became increasingly brutal in its treatment of non-Muslims under its rule.
The 'Samaritan Jews' are a tiny religious group- that is used as more advertisement of 'dhimmitude'. A better way to examine if the government of West Bank is actually capable of being tolerant, is if they would be happy to accept Hindus and Buddhists having similar rights to others in their society.
Also the 'Samaritan Jews' have been in conflict with mainstream Judaism, and have been for a long time. So much so, that the Samaritans aren't recognized as Jews but as a separate religious grouping. West Bank giving them representation means nothing. They have no real power to speak of in the West Bank.
With all that being said the idea you can just drop a concept such as decentralized governance for example, into that region and expect it'll work is wrong. The biggest reason is the culture. Decentralization- especially in the modern era, is borne out of the Anglo-Protestant dissenting movement. Different cultures even if they're share some similarities produce different results.
In Israel the government cannot be decentralized because it is 'expected' to protect Jewish communities in that land. That's why the overwhelmingly majority of land is controlled by the government, leading to a situation where people get land on a long term lease.
augustuscato / Augustus Cato
npub1p2…hpqlq
2025-05-30 14:55:27
in reply to nevent1q…0pls
Author Public Key
npub1p22hyejtr60rdrmjvql5k8fyv8lkq8exzw5mkkx3qcwqcu6979aqvhpqlqSeen on
wss://nostr.momPublished at
2025-05-30 14:55:27Event JSON
{
"id": "3f43ecc8eabe9ad7939983155529655f4363f18ae36c49664b76bacb8dabd516",
"pubkey": "0a9572664b1e9e368f72603f4b1d2461ff601f2613a9bb58d1061c0c7345f17a",
"created_at": 1748616927,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"fdc56fa2f42be4b1ecbc242eb10ecd6b93b5632e9134041aba79942bff7217f8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"52dd43848fd7938ec2619045d262f240ad07c11ea2a5b70a297b736734f080fc"
],
[
"e",
"706f1b50e9e2f7cdde64ce7684480c89eefdae3a1b56aca29ca4680274c0aff4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"0a9572664b1e9e368f72603f4b1d2461ff601f2613a9bb58d1061c0c7345f17a"
],
[
"p",
"a96a35a224402b8075c4da20f0477896afcc3395b6fad63e30a648a8222a6a69"
],
[
"r",
"c.1864"
]
],
"content": "The Romans under Theodosius I and Theodosius II:\na) banned interrmarriage between Christians and Jews \nb) legally excluded them from serving in public offices- civilian and military.( exception was tax collection)\nc) Made conversion to Judaism illegal.\n\nUnder Justinian the Byzantine Romans continued to legally ban the construction of new synagogues.\n\nWith the Ottomans, Jewish communities were expected to pay the jizya- a protection payment levied on a non-muslim for living in the Ottoman Empire.\nNot to mention:\na. the Damascus affair of 1840\nb. The 1828 Baghdad massacre of the Jews\nc.1864 massacre of Jews in Marrakech and Fezin Morocco\nd. Targeting of Jews in Libya between 1860 and 1897- where synagogues were ransacked and Jewish individuals killed.\n\nOn the Mamluks, they don't fair any better especially as the state over time became increasingly brutal in its treatment of non-Muslims under its rule.\n\nThe 'Samaritan Jews' are a tiny religious group- that is used as more advertisement of 'dhimmitude'. A better way to examine if the government of West Bank is actually capable of being tolerant, is if they would be happy to accept Hindus and Buddhists having similar rights to others in their society.\nAlso the 'Samaritan Jews' have been in conflict with mainstream Judaism, and have been for a long time. So much so, that the Samaritans aren't recognized as Jews but as a separate religious grouping. West Bank giving them representation means nothing. They have no real power to speak of in the West Bank.\n\nWith all that being said the idea you can just drop a concept such as decentralized governance for example, into that region and expect it'll work is wrong. The biggest reason is the culture. Decentralization- especially in the modern era, is borne out of the Anglo-Protestant dissenting movement. Different cultures even if they're share some similarities produce different results. \nIn Israel the government cannot be decentralized because it is 'expected' to protect Jewish communities in that land. That's why the overwhelmingly majority of land is controlled by the government, leading to a situation where people get land on a long term lease.\n\n",
"sig": "3e22646721128accdd524a20db536f06651fd24d4372b119de7b9a3a4874e04b5f42112ae8ba8be7311eecad57d67b8a599dbb5144d6f12abfa30715bb2cfbca"
}