Who were the Muladíes?

The non-Arab Muslims of Al-Andalus

Christians living in Al-Andalus

The Muslim population of Al-Andalus

1. Class 1: Al-Andalus

22nd Feb What we wear virtual class 1-b By Mrs Raja Al-Ebrahim

The LMS has been an essential tool in curriculum design and development and in organizing factors that motivate student learning, especially in online distance learning. However, an LMS can be used in blended, hybrid, and in-class delivery modes. It is a software application designed to help in the administration of courses for both students and instructors. Such systems have been designed for use in learning and teaching activities (Chung et al., 2012). They also provide a variety of interaction methods between instructors and learners to facilitate the learning process better, You must remember well-designed LMS could also help improve student skills, such as effective online learning and self-direction (Norouzi, 2014). Students could use the system to enhance performance (perceived usefulness), and they could use such systems with little effort (perceived ease of use) (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). A majority of higher education institutions have incorporated LMS systems; they have been used in university systems by schools, faculty members, and instructors (Klobas & McGill,. 2010), Because so much of higher education has been focused on course delivery Chapter3 INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERY SYSTEMS AND EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY i 71 in a physical classroom, the implementation of an LYS has a;ded institutons in transitioning to new online universe of curriculum de!ivery (Georgou!i, & Guerre. 2NS). Repositories, central databases, and online meeting 'oations are all characteristcs of a management system. As a concept, a 'earning management system is a broad idea and an example of technology's inabifity to be specific in terms of a definition. Several requirements a generat overview of what constitutes a leaming management system, such as those listed above Finally, end-user access is also a part of a learning management system with various levels being set up by security. For example, students have read-onty access, faculty members have read and write access, and technical staff has complete access for support and administrative duties (Graf & Chien, 2009). At its core, a learning management system contains internal or Web-based support and management for numerous aspects of learning and teaching (Hiary & Abu-Shawar, 2009). This allows access from numerous locales, usually on a 24-hour basis. When looking at a university or college, this concept begins to grow greatly depending on the organization's size and scope; department, and degree program. Leaming management systems also go by other names such as course management systems, and their use goes beyond higher education institutions to include businesses and individual instructors. Meis)ar-Tal, Kurtz, and Pieterse (2012) mentioned three primary purposes of an CMS. They include the following: 1. to provide students with digital learning materials; 2. to employ interactive learning activities with students in the forums; and 3. to manage the course and the learners. Faculty members who use an LMS to make available lecture notes and other classroom resources for their face-to-face class create a web-enhanced classroom experience. Regardless of its usage, requirements for classification as a learning management system include several key concepts like the availability of assets over networks, providing hosting, administration. and support. With the requirements set, utilization becomes the focal point. A fully utilized learning management system looks at use at the student level, faculty level, and administration level. proper utilization of learning management systems should mirror traditional higher education goals, enhancing students' experiences. For learninä management systems, this creates a central hub for a class activity. For some classes, all activities work in the learning management system, while others only use its resources for select activities.

1.3.2 Multilingüismo individual: ¿somos todos multilingües? ¿Qué quiere decir ser bilingüe o ser multilingüe? Podríamos definir el bilingüismo o multilingüismo individual como la capacidad de una persona de hablar dos o más lenguas. Pero esta definición tiene varias carencias. Tradicionalmente, se pensaba que solo las personas que alcanzaban un dominio similar al de un nativo en cada una de las lenguas que hablaban podían considerarse «bilingües de verdad» o «multilingües de verdad». Pero, ¿qué ocurre con las personas que aprenden una lengua extranjera sin dominarla igual que su lengua materna? ¿Y las personas que son capaces de entender una lengua, tal vez la que se habla en su casa, pero no de hablarla con fluidez? ¿Y qué pasa con las personas que pueden hablar un idioma bastante bien, pero no saben escribir en ese idioma? ¿Y los que pueden leer y entender un texto en una lengua extranjera, pero no pueden comunicarse activamente en ella? Hoy sabemos que, aunque el dominio de dos (o más) lenguas como el de un nativo se pueda dar, en realidad es algo muy poco frecuente, ya que la inmensa mayoría de personas bilingües y multilingües no tienen el mismo grado de competencia en todas sus lenguas. De hecho, es muy común tener una lengua dominante o de preferencia, una lengua en la que una persona se desenvuelve con mayor fluidez o que prefiere en determinados ámbitos o situaciones. Imagínate a un niño que vive en el Reino Unido y habla ruso en casa con su familia e inglés en la escuela. Evidentemente, podrá hablar con más fluidez sobre algunos temas en ruso y sobre otros en inglés. ¿Significa eso que no es bilingüe? En absoluto, lo veremos enseguida. También es muy común, sobre todo entre las personas que han aprendido una segunda (o tercera) lengua más tarde, que una de las dos lenguas interfiera con la otra, algo que puede reflejarse en su acento, en ciertas estructuras gramaticales, en el vocabulario, etc. Imaginemos a un profesor universitario francés que lleva veinte años viviendo y trabajando en Inglaterra. Puede comunicarse con soltura en inglés tanto en situaciones formales como informales y ha publicado libros tanto en inglés como en francés. Sin embargo, sigue hablando en inglés con acento francés y, después de tantos años en Inglaterra, a veces le cuesta encontrar las palabras adecuadas cuando habla en francés. ¿Y qué pasa con esta persona? ¿La considerarías bilingüe? Continuo bilingüe. Las mayúsculas y el tamaño de letra más grande indican un mayor dominio de la lengua A o B. (A partir de Valdés 2014). Monolingüe lengua A Monolingüe lengua B A Ab Ab Ab Ab aB Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba B debe ser bonito ser bilingue 22 INCLUSIÓN, DIVERSIDAD Y COMUNICACIÓN ENTRE CULTURAS En la actualidad, muchos lingüistas consideran que el bilingüismo (o el multilingüismo) no es un estado que pueda alcanzarse con el tiempo, sino más bien un continuo, es decir, una progresión gradual entre dos extremos opuestos. En un extremo está el monolingüismo en la lengua A, y en el otro el monolingüismo en la lengua B. Cualquier individuo con competencias lingüísticas en ambas lenguas podría situarse entre esos dos polos. Dependiendo de su competencia y fluidez en cada lengua, se situaría más cerca de un extremo u otro del continuo. Por ejemplo, una persona con un gran dominio de una de las lenguas, pero con un dominio limitado de la otra, podría situarse en el polo Ab, mientras que una persona con un dominio de ambas lenguas similar al de un nativo se situaría en el medio, en el polo aB. La idea de un continuo bilingüe nos permite ver el bilingüismo como un proceso y tiene en cuenta el hecho de que el dominio de cualquiera de las dos lenguas puede cambiar con el tiempo. Es posible ganar competencias en una lengua, pero también perderlas. Según esta concepción más amplia del bilingüismo, incluso los estudiantes que se inician en una lengua extranjera podrían considerarse bilingües, aunque, por supuesto, al principio estarían bastante cerca de uno de los extremos monolingües del continuo. En cualquier caso, las personas bilingües y plurilingües se encuentran a menudo con tópicos o conceptos erróneos sobre lo que supone hablar y «vivir» en dos o más idiomas. Uno de los prejuicios más problemáticos es que la exposición a varias lenguas es perjudicial para el desarrollo del lenguaje en los menores. Antes se creía que los menores criados de forma bilingüe o multilingüe nunca lograrían aprender bien ninguna de las lenguas en cuestión. Por ello, docentes y pediatras desaconsejaban a los padres criar a sus hijos de forma bilingüe o multilingüe, y a menudo se les animaba a hablar con ellos en la lengua mayoritaria de su sociedad, aunque ellos mismos no dominaran esa lengua. Presionar a los familiares para que no hablen en su lengua materna con sus hijos plantea una serie SABÍAS QUE… el Día Internacional de la Lengua Materna se celebra el 21 de febrero? Fue declarado por la UNESCO en 1999 para sensibilizar sobre la diversidad lingüística y cultural y promover el multilingüismo. de problemas. Por ejemplo, los padres que hablan la lengua mayoritaria de su nueva sociedad como una lengua extranjera podrían transmitir a sus hijos patrones de pronunciación y gramática incorrectos. También se ha observado que los padres que se obligan a hablar a sus hijos en una lengua extranjera en la que no se sienten cómodos pueden comunicarse menos con ellos y ser incapaces de expresar sentimientos como la cercanía y el afecto de la forma en que lo harían en su lengua materna. Además, al no transmitir una lengua de herencia, los padres rompen el vínculo de sus hijos con los familiares que viven en el extranjero, puesto que los niños no podrán comunicarse con ellos por su cuenta. Por último, este enfoque dificulta la transmisión de las tradiciones y los valores culturales. Estas cuestiones suelen provocar problemas en la dinámica familiar que pueden ser difíciles de resolver más adelante. ¿De dónde viene la idea de la «confusión lingüística»? Uno de los principales motivos que llevan a pensar que la exposición a más de una lengua confunde a los niños es la observación de que los niños y niñas pequeños suelen combinar palabras de las distintas lenguas que hablan en una misma frase. Este fenómeno se denomina alternancia de código y es una etapa típica del desarrollo del lenguaje en los niños pequeños que se crían de forma bilingüe o multilingüe. 21/2 LENGUAS EN LA VIDA COTIDIANA 23 Sin embargo, la alternancia de código puede observarse en bilingües de cualquier edad cuando hablan con otros bilingües. Esto no significa que se confundan o sean incapaces de comunicarse correctamente en una sola lengua; es algo normal en el comportamiento lingüístico bilingüe. Llegados a este punto, es importante introducir el concepto «repertorio lingüístico». Un repertorio lingüístico incluye los recursos comunicativos de los que dispone un individuo o una comunidad de habla, es decir, las variedades lingüísticas escritas y habladas puede utilizar o que están presentes en una comunidad de hablantes. El repertorio lingüístico de las comunidades de hablantes monolingües suele estar formado por diferentes registros, estilos, dialectos, acentos, jergas y modismos. En las comunidades de habla bilingüe o multilingüe (por ejemplo, en entornos de migración o en países lingüísticamente diversos, como la India), el repertorio lingüístico no incluye solo diferentes variedades regionales, sociales y/o estilísticas en cada lengua por separado, sino también combinaciones de las diferentes lenguas habladas. Los bilingües pueden optar por cambiar y mezclar códigos en determinadas situaciones comunicativas, al igual que un hablante monolingüe puede utilizar un registro u otro en función del contexto y de con quién esté hablando. Sobre esta base, se podría incluso decir que, en sentido muy amplio, todos somos multilingües, ya que todos, monolingües y bilingües, debemos aprender a hacer malabarismos con las distintas variedades lingüísticas de nuestras sociedades. Anima a tus alumnos a realizar la actividad C para reflexionar sobre la importancia que tienen para ellos las diferentes lenguas, dialectos, acentos y ¿QUÉ PUEDO TRANSMITIR A MI ALUMNADO? · El bilingüismo o el multilingüismo no es un estado que pueda lograrse en un momento dado, sino un proceso en el que la competencia lingüística puede cambiar con el tiempo. · La mayoría de las personas bilingües y multilingües no tienen el mismo dominio de sus diferentes lenguas, y eso es algo completamente normal. · Según una concepción más amplia del bilingüismo y el multilingüismo, incluso los principiantes que aprenden una lengua extranjera podrían considerarse bilingües. · No hay que desalentar a los padres a hablar en su lengua materna con sus hijos e hijas, ya que es a través de ella como mejor pueden comunicarse, expresar sentimientos como la cercanía y el afecto, y transmitir su cultura y sus valores a la siguiente generación. En contextos de migración, los menores que dominan su lengua materna pueden mantener el contacto con los familiares que viven en el extranjero. · Las personas monolingües disponen de diferentes registros, estilos, dialectos, acentos, jergas y modismos. Las personas bilingües también pueden hacer uso de todos ellos, pero además es posible que mezclen y cambien de idioma cuando hablan con otros bilingües. Hacerlo es una parte natural y normal del comportamiento lingüístico de los bilingües y no significa que se confundan o sean incapaces de comunicarse correctamente en una sola lengua. 24 INCLUSIÓN, DIVERSIDAD Y COMUNICACIÓN ENTRE CULTURAS registros. Les resultará divertido comparar los resultados entre amigos y compañeros de clase. En la actividad D, los alumnos tendrán la oportunidad de hablar sobre la alternancia de código, de descubrir el significado de un texto escrito en muchas lenguas diferentes e incluso de crear su propio texto multilingüe. 1.4 CONCLUSIONES En este capítulo hemos presentado diferentes aspectos relacionados con las lenguas en el mundo y en nuestra vida cotidiana. Hemos explicado que las lenguas no son objetos estáticos, sino organismos vivos que interactúan y se relacionan entre sí y están en constante evolución. Las lenguas no solo transmiten mensajes, sino también los valores culturales y sociales de las personas que las hablan e incluso una forma de ver o entender el mundo. A pesar de lo que nos puedan hacer creer, el multilingüismo no es la excepción en el mundo, sino la norma. Por tanto, nuestra diversidad lingüística puede considerarse una forma más de biodiversidad, que también hay que proteger. En el capítulo 2 nos centraremos en los aspectos culturales de nuestras sociedades multiculturales y multilingües.

Analizziamo il testo fornito, focalizzandoci sui seguenti punti: 1. **Contesto storico e allargamento del suffragio:** Il testo descrive l'espansione della società e l'ingresso di un numero crescente di cittadini nella vita politica alla fine del XIX secolo. Sebbene si tenda a pensare a questa epoca come un periodo di democratizzazione, il testo sottolinea come il diritto di voto, pur essendo un'obbligazione per i cittadini "maturi" (istruiti, arruolati), non fosse universalmente riconosciuto. Viene evidenziato come il suffragio universale maschile fosse una realtà solo in pochi paesi (Francia, Germania, Svizzera) nel 1890, e come si sia esteso gradualmente ad altri paesi europei nei decenni successivi, spesso eliminando la divisione per censo che escludeva le masse povere. Il testo sottolinea che l'allargamento del suffragio è stato un processo lungo e complesso, con resistenze da parte delle classi dominanti. 2. **Nascita dei partiti di massa e del sindacalismo:** L'estensione del diritto di voto ha portato alla necessità di nuove forme di organizzazione politica. Nacquero così i partiti di massa, con il Partito Socialdemocratico tedesco come esempio pionieristico. Parallelamente, si assiste a una crescita esponenziale delle organizzazioni sindacali, grazie alla maggiore coscienza dei lavoratori. Vengono citate le principali confederazioni sindacali europee, come le *Three Unions* inglesi, la Commissione Centrale dei Liberi Sindacati Tedeschi, la CGT francese e la CGIL italiana. Il testo evidenzia come il sindacalismo sia diventato una forza significativa nella lotta per i diritti dei lavoratori. 3. **La questione femminile:** Il testo affronta anche la questione femminile, sottolineando come, nonostante i primi movimenti di emancipazione risalenti alla Rivoluzione Francese e alla Rivoluzione Industriale inglese, le donne fossero ancora escluse dalla vita politica e da molte professioni. Viene menzionato il diritto di voto concesso in alcuni stati minori come la Finlandia e la Norvegia, ma si evidenzia come il lavoro femminile fosse spesso una necessità più che un'emancipazione, con salari inferiori a quelli degli uomini. Il testo descrive come, con l'aumento dell'istruzione e della politicizzazione, anche le donne abbiano iniziato a rivendicare i propri diritti, partecipando alle lotte sindacali. Viene citato il movimento delle suffragette britanniche guidato da Evelyn Pankhurst, che attraverso azioni di protesta riuscì a portare l'attenzione dell'opinione pubblica sulla questione del suffragio femminile, ottenendo una prima vittoria nel 1918. Il testo spiega anche come parte del movimento socialista non vedesse di buon occhio il voto femminile, temendo un orientamento politico più centrista o cattolico delle donne. In generale, il testo sottolinea come i risultati ottenuti dalle donne nella lotta per i loro diritti fossero ancora limitati all'inizio del XX secolo. 4. **Riforme sociali e fiscali:** Il testo descrive come le lotte sindacali abbiano portato a importanti riforme sociali, come assicurazioni contro gli infortuni, pensioni di vecchiaia, sussidi di disoccupazione, controlli sulla sicurezza e l'igiene nelle fabbriche, limitazione del lavoro minorile, riduzione dell'orario di lavoro e diritto al riposo settimanale. Viene evidenziato come queste riforme siano state il risultato della pressione dei sindacati sui governi centrali. Parallelamente, le amministrazioni locali hanno iniziato a investire in servizi pubblici come gas, acqua corrente e trasporti, e in infrastrutture come scuole, biblioteche, musei, ospedali e alloggi popolari. L'aumento della spesa pubblica ha reso necessaria una riforma fiscale, con l'introduzione di tasse dirette e progressive, considerate più eque rispetto alle tasse indirette. Il testo sottolinea come questa riforma fiscale abbia eroso ulteriormente il potere delle antiche forze sociali come la nobiltà e i proprietari terrieri. 5. **Ascesa del socialismo:** Il testo conclude evidenziando come tutti i fenomeni descritti, dai movimenti sindacali alle lotte dei lavoratori e all'allargamento del suffragio, abbiano avuto come protagonista un'ideologia emergente: il socialismo.

Durata: 2 ore Obiettivi della lezione: ✅ Comprendere l’importanza del menù nella ristorazione ✅ Analizzare i criteri per la creazione di un menù bilanciato ✅ Studiare le tipologie di menù ✅ Saper progettare un menù in base al contesto e al target PRIMA PARTE: TEORIA (50 minuti) 1. L’importanza del menù nella ristorazione Il menù è la “vetrina” del ristorante: definisce l’identità del locale Influenza la scelta del cliente e il successo economico dell’attività Deve rispettare la filosofia del ristorante (tradizionale, gourmet, etnico, fast casual, fine dining…) 2. Le tipologie di menù 🔹 Menù fisso → prezzo stabilito, piatti predefiniti (es. menù turistico) 🔹 Menù à la carte → ampia scelta, prezzi diversi per ogni portata 🔹 Menù degustazione → percorso gastronomico consigliato dallo chef 🔹 Menù stagionale → basato su ingredienti disponibili in una stagione 🔹 Menù dietetico o speciale → per esigenze alimentari (vegetariano, vegano, senza glutine, ipocalorico) 3. Criteri per la creazione di un menù equilibrato ✔ Equilibrio nutrizionale → bilanciamento tra proteine, carboidrati e verdure ✔ Varietà di sapori, colori e consistenze → alternare piatti leggeri e strutturati ✔ Stagionalità e territorialità → ingredienti freschi e locali ✔ Fattibilità tecnica → piatti realizzabili con attrezzature e personale disponibili ✔ Food cost e profitto → costi delle materie prime e margine di guadagno SECONDA PARTE: ESERCITAZIONE PRATICA (50 minuti) Attività 1: Analisi di menù esistenti (20 min) 📌 Gli studenti analizzano diversi menù di ristoranti reali, valutando: Struttura (numero di portate) Bilanciamento dei piatti Prezzi e target di clientela 🔹 Domande guida: Il menù è vario ed equilibrato? I prezzi sono coerenti con la qualità e il tipo di locale? Il menù è chiaro e leggibile? Attività 2: Creazione di un menù (30 min) 📌 Divisi in gruppi, gli studenti progettano un menù per un ristorante a scelta tra: Trattoria tradizionale Ristorante gourmet Pizzeria con proposte innovative Street food di alta qualità 🔹 Consegna: 4 portate (antipasto, primo, secondo, dessert) Nome dei piatti e breve descrizione Prezzo indicativo Giustificazione delle scelte 🎤 Presentazione finale: ogni gruppo presenta il proprio menù alla classe e ne discute le scelte. CONCLUSIONE (20 minuti) Revisione delle attività svolte Domande e chiarimenti Riflessione sull’importanza della progettazione di un buon menù

MYTH The British helped the Jews displace the native Arab population of Palestine. FACT Herbert Samuel, a British Jew who served as the first High Commissioner of Palestine, placed restrictions on Jewish immigration “in the ‘interests of the present population’ and the ‘absorptive capacity’ of the country.”1 The influx of Jewish settlers was said to force the Arab fellahin (native peasants) from their land. This was when less than a million people lived in an area that now supports more than nine million. The British limited the absorptive capacity of Palestine when, in 1921, Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill severed nearly four-fifths of Palestine—some thirty-five thousand square miles—to create a new Arab entity, Transjordan. As a consolation prize for the Hejaz and Arabia (which are both now Saudi Arabia) going to the Saud family, Churchill rewarded Sharif Hussein’s son Abdullah for his contribution to the war against Turkey by installing him as Transjordan’s emir. The British went further and placed restrictions on Jewish land purchases in what remained of Palestine. By 1949, the British had allotted 87,500 acres of the 187,500 acres of cultivable land to Arabs and only 4,250 acres to Jews. This contradicted Article 6 of the Mandate which stated that “the Administration of Palestine…shall encourage, in cooperation with the Jewish Agency…close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not acquired for public purposes.”2 Ultimately, the British admitted that the argument about the country’s absorptive capacity was specious. The Peel Commission said, “The heavy immigration in the years 1933–36 would seem to show that the Jews have been able to enlarge the absorptive capacity of the country for Jews.”3 MYTH The British allowed Jews to flood Palestine while Arab immigration was tightly controlled. FACT The British response to Jewish immigration set a precedent of appeasing the Arabs, which was followed for the duration of the Mandate. The British restricted Jewish immigration while allowing Arabs to enter the country freely. Apparently, London did not feel that a flood of Arab immigrants would affect the country’s “absorptive capacity.” During World War I, the Jewish population in Palestine declined because of the war, famine, disease, and expulsion by the Turks. In 1915, approximately 83,000 Jews lived in Palestine among 590,000 Muslim and Christian Arabs. According to the 1922 census, the Jewish population was 83,000, while the Arabs numbered 643,000.4 Thus, the Arab population grew exponentially while that of the Jews stagnated. In the mid-1920s, Jewish immigration to Palestine increased primarily because of anti-Jewish economic legislation in Poland and Washington’s imposition of restrictive quotas.5 The record number of immigrants in 1935 (see table) was a response to the growing persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany. The British administration considered this number too large, however, so the Jewish Agency was informed that less than one-third of the quota it asked for would be approved in 1936.6 The British gave in further to Arab demands by announcing in the 1939 White Paper that an independent Arab state would be created within ten years and that Jewish immigration was to be limited to 75,000 for the next five years, after which it was to cease altogether. It also forbade land sales to Jews in 95% of the territory of Palestine. The Arabs, nevertheless, rejected the proposal. Jewish Immigration to Palestine7 1919 1,806 1931 4,075 1920 8,223 1932 12,533 1921 8,294 1933 37,337 1922 8,685 1934 45,267 1923 8,175 1935 66,472 1924 13,892 1936 29,595 1925 34,386 1937 10,629 1926 13,855 1938 14,675 1927 3,034 1939 31,195 1928 2,178 1940 10,643 1929 5,249 1941 4,592 1930 4,944 By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan, and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants.8 The British governor of the Sinai from 1922 to 1936 observed, “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.”9 The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is…due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.”10 MYTH The British changed their policy to allow Holocaust survivors to settle in Palestine. FACT The gates of Palestine remained closed for the duration of the war, stranding hundreds of thousands of Jews in Europe, many of whom became victims of Hitler’s “Final Solution.” After the war, the British refused to allow the survivors of the Nazi nightmare to find sanctuary in Palestine. On June 6, 1946, President Truman urged the British government to relieve the suffering of the Jews confined to displaced persons camps in Europe by immediately accepting 100,000 Jewish immigrants. Britain’s foreign minister Ernest Bevin replied sarcastically that the United States wanted displaced Jews to immigrate to Palestine “because they did not want too many of them in New York.”11 Some Jews reached Palestine, many smuggled in on dilapidated ships organized by the Haganah. Between August 1945 and the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, sixty-five “illegal” immigrant ships, carrying 69,878 people, arrived from European shores. In August 1946, however, the British began to intern those they caught in camps on Cyprus. Approximately 50,000 people were detained in the camps, and 28,000 remained imprisoned when Israel declared independence.12 MYTH As the Jewish population grew, the plight of the Palestinian Arabs worsened. FACT In July 1921, Hasan Shukri, the mayor of Haifa and president of the Muslim National Associations, sent a telegram to the British government in reaction to a delegation of Palestinians that went to London to try to stop the implementation of the Balfour Declaration. Shukri wrote: We are certain that without Jewish immigration and financial assistance there will be no future development of our country as may be judged from the fact that the towns inhabited in part by Jews such as Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa, and Tiberias are making steady progress while Nablus, Acre, and Nazareth where no Jews reside are steadily declining.13 The Jewish population increased by 470,000 between World War I and World War II, while the non-Jewish population rose by 588,000.14 The permanent Arab population increased by 120% between 1922 and 1947.15 This rapid growth of the Arab population was a result of several factors. One was immigration from neighboring states—constituting 37% of the total immigration to pre-state Israel—by Arabs who wanted to take advantage of the higher standard of living the Jews had made possible.16 The Arab population also grew because of the improved living conditions created by the Jews as they drained malarial swamps and brought improved sanitation and health care to the region. Thus, for example, the Muslim infant mortality rate fell from 201 per thousand in 1925 to 94 per thousand in 1945, and life expectancy rose from 37 years in 1926 to 49 in 1943.17 The Arab population increased the most in cities where large Jewish populations had created new economic opportunities. From 1922–1947, the non-Jewish population increased by 290% in Haifa, 131% in Jerusalem, and 158% in Jaffa. The growth in Arab towns was more modest: 42% in Nablus, 78% in Jenin, and 37% in Bethlehem.18 MYTH Jews stole Arab land. FACT Despite the growth in their population, the Arabs continued to assert they were being displaced. From the beginning of World War I, however, part of Palestine’s land was owned by absentee landlords who lived in Cairo, Damascus, and Beirut. About 80% of the Palestinian Arabs were debt-ridden peasants, semi-nomads, and Bedouins.19 Jews went out of their way to avoid purchasing land in areas where Arabs might be displaced. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, cheap, and—most important—without tenants. In 1920, Labor Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion expressed his concern about the Arab fellahin, whom he viewed as “the most important asset of the native population.” He insisted that “under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them.” Instead, he advocated helping liberate them from their oppressors. “Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement,” Ben-Gurion added, “should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price.”20 Jews only began to purchase cultivated land after buying all the uncultivated territory. Many Arabs were willing to sell because of the migration to coastal towns and because they needed money to invest in the citrus industry.21 When John Hope Simpson arrived in Palestine in May 1930, he observed, “They [the Jews] paid high prices for the land and, in addition, they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay.”22 In 1931, Lewis French conducted a survey of landlessness for the British government and offered new plots to any Arabs who had been “dispossessed.” British officials received more than 3,000 applications, of which 80% were ruled invalid by the government’s legal adviser because the applicants were not landless Arabs. This left only about 600 landless Arabs, 100 of whom accepted the government land offer.23 In April 1936, a new outbreak of Arab attacks on Jews was instigated by local Palestinian leaders who were later joined by Arab volunteers led by a Syrian guerrilla named Fawzi al-Qawuqji, the commander of the Arab Liberation Army. By November, when the British finally sent a new commission headed by Lord Peel to investigate, 89 Jews had been killed and more than 300 wounded.24 The Peel Commission’s report found that Arab complaints about Jewish land acquisition were baseless. It pointed out that “much of the land now carrying orange groves was sand dunes or swamp and uncultivated when it was purchased…There was at the time of the earlier sales little evidence that the owners possessed either the resources or training needed to develop the land.”25 Moreover, the Commission found the shortage was “due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” The report concluded that the presence of Jews in Palestine, along with the work of the British administration, had resulted in higher wages, an improved standard of living, and ample employment opportunities.26 It is made quite clear to all, both by the map drawn up by the Simpson Commission and by another compiled by the Peel Commission, that the Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in useless wailing and weeping (emphasis in the original). —Transjordan’s king Abdullah27 Even at the height of the Arab revolt in 1938 (which began in April 1936 with the murder of two Jews by Arabs and the subsequent murder of two Arab workers by members of the Jewish underground28), the British high commissioner to Palestine believed the Arab landowners were complaining about sales to Jews to drive up prices for lands they wished to sell. Many Arab landowners had been so terrorized by Arab rebels they decided to leave Palestine and sell their property to the Jews.29 The Jews paid exorbitant prices to wealthy landowners for small tracts of arid land. “In 1944, Jews paid between $1,000 and $1,100 per acre in Palestine, mostly for arid or semiarid land; in the same year, rich black soil in Iowa was selling for about $110 per acre.”30 By 1947, Jewish holdings in Palestine amounted to about 463,000 acres. Approximately 45,000 were acquired from the mandatory government, 30,000 were bought from various churches, and 387,500 were purchased from Arabs. Analyses of land purchases from 1880 to 1948 show that 73% of Jewish plots were purchased from large landowners, not poor fellahin.31 Many leaders of the Arab nationalist movement, including members of the Muslim Supreme Council, and the mayors of Gaza, Jerusalem, and s sold land to the Jews. As’ad el-Shuqeiri, a Muslim religious scholar and father of Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Ahmed Shuqeiri, took Jewish money for his land. Even King Abdullah leased land to the Jews.32 MYTH The British helped the Palestinians to live peacefully with the Jews. FACT In 1921, Haj Amin el-Husseini first began to organize fedayeen (“one who sacrifices himself”) to terrorize Jews. El-Husseini hoped to duplicate the success of Kemal Atatürk in Turkey by driving the Jews out of Palestine just as Kemal had driven the invading Greeks from his country.33 Arab radicals gained influence because the British administration was unwilling to take effective action against them until they began a revolt against British rule. Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, former head of British military intelligence in Cairo, and later chief political officer for Palestine and Syria, wrote in his diary that British officials “incline towards the exclusion of Zionism in Palestine.” The British encouraged the Palestinians to attack the Jews. According to Meinertzhagen, Col. Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor (financial adviser to the military administration in Palestine 1919–23) met with el-Husseini in 1920, a few days before Easter, and told him that “he had a great opportunity at Easter to show the world…that Zionism was unpopular not only with the Palestine administration but in Whitehall.” He added that “if disturbances of sufficient violence occurred in Jerusalem at Easter, both General [Louis] Bols [chief administrator in Palestine, 1919–20] and General [Edmund] Allenby [commander of the Egyptian force, 1917–19, then high commissioner of Egypt] would advocate the abandonment of the Jewish Home. Waters-Taylor explained that freedom could only be attained through violence.”34 El-Husseini took the colonel’s advice and instigated a riot. The British withdrew their troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem, allowing the Arab mob to attack Jews and loot their shops. Because of el-Husseini’s overt role in instigating the pogrom, the British decided to arrest him. He escaped, however, and was sentenced to ten years in absentia. A year later, some British Arabists convinced High Commissioner Herbert Samuel to pardon el-Husseini and to appoint him Mufti (a cleric in charge of Jerusalem’s Islamic holy places). By contrast, Vladimir Jabotinsky and several followers, who had formed a Jewish defense organization during the unrest, were sentenced to 15 years. They were released a few months later.35 Samuel met with el-Husseini on April 11, 1921, and was assured “that the influences of his family and himself would be devoted to tranquility.” Three weeks later, riots in Jaffa and elsewhere left forty-three Jews dead.36 El-Husseini consolidated his power and took control of all Muslim religious funds in Palestine. He used his authority to gain control over the mosques, the schools, and the courts. No Arab could reach an influential position without being loyal to the Mufti. His power was so absolute that “no Muslim in Palestine could be born or die without being beholden to Haj Amin.”37 The Mufti’s henchmen also ensured he would have no opposition by systematically killing Palestinians who discussed cooperation with the Jews from rival clans. As the spokesman for Palestinian Arabs, el-Husseini did not ask that Britain grant them independence. On the contrary, in a letter to Churchill in 1921, he demanded that Palestine be reunited with Syria and Transjordan.38 The Arabs found rioting an effective political tool because of the lax British response toward violence against Jews. In handling each riot, the British prevented Jews from protecting themselves but made little effort to prevent the Arabs from attacking them. After each outbreak, a British commission of inquiry would try to establish the cause of the violence. The conclusion was always the same: The Arabs feared being displaced by the Jews. To stop the rioting, the commissions would recommend that restrictions be placed on Jewish immigration. Thus, the Arabs learned they could always stop the influx of Jews by staging riots. This cycle began after a series of riots in May 1921. After failing to protect the Jewish community from Arab mobs, the British appointed the Haycraft Commission to investigate the cause of the violence. Although the panel concluded the Arabs had been the aggressors, it rationalized the cause of the attack: “The fundamental cause of the riots was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy.”39 One consequence of the violence was the institution of a temporary ban on Jewish immigration. The Arab fear of being “displaced” or “dominated” was an excuse for their attacks on Jewish settlers. Note, too, that these riots were not inspired by nationalistic fervor—nationalists would have rebelled against their British overlords—they were motivated by economics, the radical Islamic views of the Mufti, and misunderstanding. In 1929, Arab provocateurs convinced the masses that the Jews had designs on the Temple Mount (a tactic still used today to incite violence). A Jewish religious observance at the Western Wall, which forms a part of the Temple Mount, served as a pretext for rioting by Arabs against Jews, which spilled out of Jerusalem into other villages and towns, including Safed and Hebron. Again, the British administration made no effort to prevent the violence, and, after it began, the British did nothing to protect the Jewish population. After six days of mayhem, the British finally brought troops in to quell the disturbance. By this time, most of Hebron’s Jews had fled or been killed. In all, 133 Jews were killed and 399 wounded in the pogroms.40 After the riots, the British ordered an investigation, resulting in the Passfield White Paper. It said the “immigration, land purchase and settlement policies of the Zionist Organization were already or were likely to become, prejudicial to Arab interests. It understood the mandatory government’s obligation to the non-Jewish community to mean that Palestine’s resources must be primarily reserved for the growing Arab economy.”41 This meant it was necessary to restrict Jewish immigration and land purchases. MYTH The Mufti was not a Nazi collaborator. FACT In 1941, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, fled to Germany and met with Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joachim Von Ribbentrop, and other Nazi leaders. He wanted to persuade them to extend the Nazis’ anti-Jewish program to the Arab world. The Mufti sent Hitler fifteen drafts of declarations he wanted Germany and Italy to make concerning the Middle East. One called on the two countries to declare the illegality of the Jewish home in Palestine. He also asked the Axis powers to “accord to Palestine and to other Arab countries the right to solve the problem of the Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the interest of the Arabs, and by the same method that the question is now being settled in the Axis countries.”42 In November 1941, the Mufti met with Hitler, who told him the Jews were his foremost enemy. The Nazi dictator rebuffed the Mufti’s requests for a declaration in support of the Arabs, however, telling him the time was not right. The Mufti offered Hitler his “thanks for the sympathy which he had always shown for the Arab and especially Palestinian cause, and to which he had given clear expression in his public speeches.” He added, “The Arabs were Germany’s natural friends because they had the same enemies as had Germany, namely…the Jews.” Hitler told the Mufti he opposed the creation of a Jewish state and that Germany’s objective was destroying the Jewish element in the Arab sphere.43 In 1945, Yugoslavia sought to indict the Mufti as a war criminal for his role in recruiting twenty thousand Muslim volunteers for the SS, who participated in the killing of Jews in Croatia and Hungary. He escaped French detention in 1946, however, and continued his fight against the Jews from Cairo and later Beirut where he died in 1974. MYTH The bombing of the King David Hotel was part of a deliberate terror campaign against civilians. FACT British troops seized the Jewish Agency compound on June 29, 1946, and confiscated large quantities of documents. At about the same time, more than 2,500 Jews from all over Palestine were arrested. A week later, news of a massacre of 40 Jews in a pogrom in Poland reminded the Jews of Palestine how Britain’s restrictive immigration policy had condemned thousands to death. In response to the British provocations, and a desire to demonstrate that the Jews’ spirit could not be broken, the United Resistance Movement planned to bomb the King David Hotel, which housed the British military command and the Criminal Investigation Division in addition to hotel guests. The Haganah pulled out of the plot and left it up to the Irgun. Irgun leader Menachem Begin stressed his desire to avoid civilian casualties and the plan was to warn the British so they would evacuate the building before it was blown up. Three telephone calls were placed on July 22, 1946, one to the hotel, another to the French Consulate, and a third to the Palestine Post warning that explosives in the King David Hotel would soon be detonated. The call to the hotel was received and ignored. Begin quotes one British official who supposedly refused to evacuate the building, saying, “We don’t take orders from the Jews.”44 As a result, when the bombs exploded, the casualty toll was high: 91 killed and 45 injured. Among the casualties were 15 Jews. Few people in the main part of the hotel were injured.45 For decades, the British denied they had been warned. In 1979, however, a member of the British Parliament provided the testimony of a British officer who heard other officers in the King David Hotel bar joking about a Zionist threat to the headquarters. The officer who overheard the conversation immediately left the hotel and survived.46 In contrast to Arab attacks against Jews, which Arab leaders hailed as heroic actions, the Jewish National Council denounced the bombing of the King David.47 1 Aharon Cohen, Israel and the Arab World, (NY: Funk and Wagnalls, 1970), p. 172

Margie lo scrisse perfino nel suo diario, quella sera. Sulla pagina che portava la data 17 maggio 2157, scrisse: “Oggi Tommy ha trovato un vero libro!” Era un libro antichissimo. Il nonno di Margie aveva detto una volta che, quand’era bambino lui, suo nonno gli aveva detto che c’era stata un’epoca in cui tutte le storie e i racconti erano stampati su carta. Si voltavano le pagine, che erano gialle e fruscianti, ed era buffissimo leggere parole che se ne stavano ferme invece di muoversi, com’era previsto che facessero: su uno schermo, è logico. E poi, quando si tornava alla pagina precedente, sopra c’erano le stesse parole che loro avevano già letto la prima volta – Mamma mia, che spreco – disse Tommy. – Quando uno è arrivato in fondo al libro, che cosa fa? Lo butta via, immagino. Il nostro schermo televisivo deve avere avuto un milione di libri, sopra, ed è ancora buono per chissà quanti altri. Chi si sognerebbe di buttarlo via? – Lo stesso vale per il mio – disse Margie. Aveva undici anni, lei, e non aveva visto tanti telelibri quanti ne aveva visti Tommy. Lui di anni ne aveva tredici. – Dove l’hai trovato? – gli domandò, – In casa. – Indicò lui senza guardare, perché era occupatissimo a leggere. – In solaio. – Di cosa parla? – Di scuola. – Di scuola? – Il tono di Margie era sprezzante. – Cosa c'è da scrivere, sulla scuola? Io la scuola la odio. Margie aveva sempre odiato la scuola, ma ora la odiava più che mai. L’insegnante meccanico le aveva assegnato un test dopo l’altro di geografia, e lei aveva risposto sempre peggio, finché la madre aveva scosso la testa, avvilita, e aveva mandato a chiamare l’Ispettore della Contea. Era un omino tondo tondo, l’Ispettore, con una faccia rossa e uno scatolone di arnesi con fili e con quadranti. Aveva sorriso a Margie e le aveva offerto una mela, poi aveva smontato l’insegnante in tanti pezzi. Margie aveva sperato che poi non sapesse più come rimetterli insieme, ma lui lo sapeva e, in poco più di un’ora, l’insegnante era di nuovo tutto intero, largo, nero e brutto, con un grosso schermo sul quale erano illustrate tutte le lezioni e venivano scritte tutte le domande. Ma non era quello il peggio. La cosa che Margie odiava soprattutto era la fessura dove lei doveva infilare i compiti e i testi compilati. Le toccava scriverli in un codice perforato che le avevano fatto imparare quando aveva sei anni, e il maestro meccanico calcolava i voti a una velocità spaventosa. L’ispettore aveva sorriso una volta finito il lavoro, e aveva accarezzato la testa di Margie. Alla mamma aveva detto: – Non è colpa della bambina, signora Jones. Secondo me, il settore geografia era regolato male. Sa, sono inconvenienti che capitano, a volte. L’ho rallentato. Ora è su un livello medio per alunni di dieci anni. Anzi, direi che l’andamento generale dei progressi della scolara sia piuttosto soddisfacente. – E aveva fatto un’altra carezza sulla testa a Margie. Margie era delusa. Aveva sperato che si portassero via l’insegnante, per ripararlo in officina. Una volta s’erano tenuti quello di Tommy per circa un mese, perché il settore storia era andato completamente a pallino. Così, disse a Tommy: – Ma come gli viene in mente, a uno, di scrivere un libro sulla scuola? Tommy la squadrò con aria di superiorità. – Ma non è una scuola come la nostra, stupida! Questo è un tipo di scuola molto antico, come l’avevano centinaia e centinaia di anni fa. – Poi aggiunse altezzosamente, pronunciando la parola con cura. – Secoli fa. Margie era offesa. – Be’ io non so che specie di scuola avessero, tutto quel tempo fa. – Per un po’ continuò a sbirciare il libro, china sopra la spalla di lui, poi disse: – In ogni modo, avevano un maestro? – Certo che avevano un maestro, ma non era un maestro regolare. Era un uomo. – Un uomo? Come faceva un uomo a fare il maestro? – Be’, spiegava le cose ai ragazzi e alle ragazze, dava da fare dei compiti a casa e faceva delle domande. – Un uomo non è abbastanza in gamba. – Sì che lo è. Mio papà ne sa quanto il mio maestro. – Ma va’! Un uomo non può saperne quanto un maestro. – Ne sa quasi quanto il maestro, ci scommetto. Margie non era preparata a mettere in dubbio quell’affermazione. Disse. – Io non ce lo vorrei un estraneo in casa mia, a insegnarmi. Tommy rise a più non posso. – Non sai proprio niente, Margie. Gli insegnanti non vivevano in casa. Avevano un edificio speciale e tutti i ragazzi andavano là. – E imparavano tutti la stessa cosa? – Certo, se avevano la stessa età. – Ma la mia mamma dice che un insegnante dev’essere regolato perché si adatti alla mente di uno scolaro o di una scolara, e che ogni bambino deve essere istruito in modo diverso. – Sì, però loro a quei tempi non facevano così. Se non ti va, fai a meno di leggere il libro. – Non ho detto che non mi va, io – sì affrettò a precisare Margie. Certo che voleva leggere di quelle buffe scuole. Non erano nemmeno a metà del libro quando la signora Jones chiamò: – Margie! A scuola! Margie guardò in su. – Non ancora, mamma. – Subito! – disse la signora Jones. – E sarà ora di scuola anche per Tommy, probabilmente. Margie disse a Tommy: – Posso leggere ancora un po’ il libro con te, dopo la scuola? – Vedremo – rispose lui con noncuranza. Si allontanò fischiettando, il vecchio libro polveroso stretto sotto il braccio. Margie se ne andò in classe. L’aula era proprio accanto alla sua cameretta, e l’insegnante meccanico, già in funzione, la stava aspettando. Era in funzione sempre alla stessa ora, tutti i giorni tranne il sabato e la domenica, perché la mamma diceva che le bambine imparavano meglio se imparavano a orari regolari. Lo schermo era illuminato e stava dicendo – Oggi la lezione di aritmetica è sull’addizione delle frazioni proprie. Prego inserire il compito di ieri nell’apposita fessura. Margie obbedì con un sospiro. Stava pensando alle vecchie scuole che c’erano quando il nonno di suo nonno era bambino. Ci andavano i ragazzi di tutto il vicinato, ridevano e vociavano nel cortile, sedevano insieme in classe, tornavano a casa insieme alla fine della giornata. Imparavano le stesse cose, così potevano darsi una mano a fare i compiti e parlare di quello che avevano da studiare. E i maestri erano persone... L’insegnante meccanico stava facendo lampeggiare sullo schermo: – Quando addizioniamo le frazioni 1/2 + 1/4... Margie stava pensando ai bambini di quei tempi, e a come dovevano amare la scuola. Chissà come si divertivano!, pensò.

Related quizzes

Related quizzes